Quote:
|
But to a homeless man who rapes a woman and gets 16 years in better conditions than a homeless life it isn't much of a punishment - is it?
|
Assuming that the goal of imprisonment is punishment and not public protection. I know that you're saying that you'd like to escape the trap of the limitation on the possible amounts of meaning for symbols - I just don't think that it is escaped easily.
As I often say when giving advice about failing relationships, "Potential is just potential, that doesn't mean anything truly can or will come of it."
And my other point is that there is a major problem with essentialism. Like with your rapist example: we can't determine exactly why he's doing what he's doing - we make inferences and guesses that can often be wildly uninformed. By trying to understand motives as the basis of decision-making, I think we open ourselves to misinterpretation.
Paying attention to consequences provides us with a decision-making platform that involves less guesswork (usually). So, for your rapist example. We can't tell if he's crazy, if he knew what he was doing was harmful - but, we know that rapists often rape again, so, for the protection of society he should be taken off of the streets. He can then be taken to a psychologist, possibly medicated and put in therapy, or simply locked away where he can't hurt people. Society, and this rapist, are better off because of it - is that bad? From that standpoint, it isn't nearly the guessing game as determining motives would be.