Pretty sure all the women he drugged then raped are pretty happy! I know I am and I hope he is the unwilling recipient of a few rapes during his stay...

 

Lack of remorse does come into play at sentencing . However, under controlling precedent in Pennsylvania silence at sentencing may not form the basis of finding that a defendant failed to take responsibility for his crimes, and silence at sentencing may not be the sole basis for finding that a defendant lacked remorse. To hold otherwise would constrain defendants to “the Hobson's choice” at sentencing. That is, the defendant must admit wrongdoing and jeopardize his post-trial remedies, testify falsely and risk a perjury conviction, or remain silent and risk obtaining a greater sentence.

 

Esquire, thank you for clarification.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Sep 27, 2018

A public pillory this is!

Everyone have their very own opinion on issues like this - I have one or two myself.

Having an opinion is not the same as you should feel you´re forced to express you opinion in public... especially when it´s based on a hysterical trend that has successfully spread all over the world with the speed of lightning in recent years - In the US it seems you have a legal system where 10.000 of lawyers make loads of money for themself and their clients to process cases based on lies and desires for revenge, money, need for fame etc.
I fear for the day when it turns out that a lot of people have been innocently convicted because of false slander, lies, money, fame and revenge when the Metoo storm has settled (5 to 10 years) from now on.

This is most reminiscent of the things that took place in the European Middle Ages with the pursuit of witches and trolls.

I guess the problem is structural and cultural!

Just an example:
It´s been a well known fact for decades in the US that if you let your daughter study in a high school or university the chance that she will be exposed to rape or the like is a very common experience.

Mr. Cosby is a celebrity - or was! People love celebrities ups and especially their downs!

Mr. Cosby did what he did (I dont have any exact insight in this... just what the papers and you told me). Basic line: what took place was between adults (afaik).... not kids - and I´ll keep from mention the Catholic Church world wide in this context

My 50 cents

 

Complicated issue. Long philosophical discussions armed with the best facts science can offer often fail to produce agreement or conclusion, regarding how we "ought" to feel and what we "ought" to do.
But there is one important aspect to this (and all of "life") that can help us to avoid fallacious and detrimental conclusions.
That aspect is "TRAGEDY".
I wrote a whole page on it just now even though i knew i would not post it. Just going over the aspects and poking at them.
Actually hitting them with hammers and burning them and crushing them and shredding them...
What was left when I was done?
Just this: Life is full or tragedy. Life IS tragedy. No one is "to blame".

Ok, NOT just that.
It is tragic what happened to those women, and tragic that an old blind man might spend his remaining years in prison.
It is tragic that we have too look at ourselves as humans and wonder what is wrong with us.
It is tragic that most of us only look at others and ask what is wrong with THEM.

There is an idea .. a dangerous one, that none of us are to blame for anything that happens, because we are all victims of our genetics, and our environment. We did not choose what we are. We did not pop out of the womb and decide to become serial killers ... or maybe just annoying neighbors. No one is to credit for whatever good they do, either.
And it is also true that we are to credit for nothing. All our striving to achieve is only a manifestation of the matrix of genetic predispositions and environment. No one popped out of the womb and decide to save the world or make some dubstep.
Well, maybe some dubstep, but the question remains whether that is good or bad, and another thread for that.

The danger in this fact is that it can lead some to conclude those facts about our life here exempts them from being judged and/or punished. It can lead some to say they are not "responsible" or act from that idea.
(That is the reason for religion, some say. We need to fear some judgment and punishment to make us behave better.)

But there are other facts, all based in our genetic predispositions and our environment, that make that a pathetic conclusion, and we ought not fear the idea we are not "to blame". "Responsible for" and "to blame" are not the same thing. It might be a word-game, but this is a game of words..of ideas and the words we use to define, represent and understand the ideas.

So it is a tragic what happened to those women, and tragic whatever might happen to Cosby.
It is tragic that some humans, of no choice, become serial-killers.
It is also tragic that they should be executed.

This all means, of course, that dubstep is also tragic.
But who am I to judge nature?

 

I know nothing about Quaaludes and was under the impression that they knocked you unconscious. Obviously you have used them on a personal level. I would like to ask what effect they actually have on you?

 

Quaaludes were everywhere, and nobody called them anything but "Ludes". You could easily buy them in discos and other clubs, there was always somebody dealing them. A Lude and a glass of wine, that was a thing. What they did was totally take away your inhibitions, create a warm fuzzy feeling. Sex before people began becoming sick from immune system failure or what they labeled Aids, was a fairly open kind of behavior and I guess could be said, decedent in the late 1970's and early 80's. I can't imagine taking three of them as was what was talked about in the Cosby trial. That would have knock me out cold for sure and I wouldn't have remembered what happened during the maybe eight or so hours later that I would even begin to come out of it. Someone could without a doubt have their way with someone that ate three. One was fun. Three? ...not me

 

Right! That makes sense. Take one to get high or drop 3 in someones drink to take advantage. I don't know if they ever made their way to the UK but I was drugged once many years ago and I lost all memory of the following hours and to this day don't know what drug was used!

 

1. False religions institute fear-based punishment and make it part of their teaching. Programming their populace to accept violence and brutality, or at the very least: to doctrinally turn a blind eye to it. The ultimate result of this is that an external force must come and destroy the destroyers. (Usually it is nature.)

2. Another kind of false religion decreases responsibility to the minimum required (self-defined) - in other words one can do whatever one wants. There are absolutely no/very little consequences. Its ultimate result is self-dissolution. (Neither type of religion is true, both lead to self-destruction and to the destruction of the civilization which practices either of the two extremes.)

3. The third alternative is to do away with religion altogether and to have secular law be the law of the land. This is what the Western world is in the throes of at this moment, and its a failing system. (It leads to the same place as option 2.)

A true religion teaches balance and causality, which emphasizes consequences for everything: for every thought and action. But it balances this with forgiveness and repentance. A true religion teaches the most optimum way: to love others as themselves, to do good to all even if they do evil to you. To treat others as one would like to be treated, to improve the self not according to personal philosophy but to the eternal teaching of God. To use that wisdom to avoid being taken advantage of by iniquitous individuals, by changing the self, thus no longer being drawn to the type of places/people that cause harm.

Yes but these can be overcome. That's the whole point. You do have a choice. It's difficult to overcome, but not impossible.
The universe is a free will creation, not a deterministic one where every soul is a pawn and a puppet. (Unless you put yourself in that position by following one of the 3 points above.)

The other part of this, is that the longer a family lineage is involved in criminal acts and immorality, the more those ways/actions taint that family and become a part of their genetic make up/predisposition (which can manifest itself in future generations - in varying ways). Iniquity becomes normalized within a lineage, so that what was once deemed deviant and known to be wrong, becomes seen as evolution/progress, or "keeping up with the times", or it is simply not even observed within the self, but unconsciously acted out. So that every succeeding generation has more internal issues on its plate. It can get to a point, where a generation (or one person within that generation) doesn't care at all about transcending the evil they've inherited, but rather becomes the most extreme expression of it. Deriving power, self-worth and reprieve from their own traumas by harming others. Or in their own mind: "bringing order out chaos", which is actually them attempting to bring internal order within themselves by ordering the external world according to their distorted perception of reality.

This kind of vague philosophy is in itself dangerous, because no one ever learns by following it. Life is hope, not tragedy, unless you never learn. And yes responsibility must be taken for oneself when one has done wrong, it is an act of maturity and humility to admit it. And to take steps to completely prevent it in the future.

It's true that human society does not deal well with those who have done wrong or committed criminal acts, and that justice is not served by condemning someone, but by investing into them, creating an opportunity for them to learn and to realize what they have done. Punishment, such as prison (in and of itself), merely fosters resentment and makes the inmates cling to their incorrect behaviours. The only people to ever turn around fully and remarkably are those who hear the good news of the gospel. Others, they may calm down, they may appear to return to normal human functioning - but that's not what life is about. That's mere survival. Yet most never truly get better, because the system is not meant to truly help the incarcerated, merely to take vengence upon them. To sequester them away from "normal" society.

Well, from an ultimate perspective, it can be said that humans weren't created to condemn one another, but to love one another. So yes, when someone does wrong, those who are meant to be there to correct the person, are themselves doing wrong when they send the wrongdoer to rot in prison. That's not the way.

Human justice is rarely just or beneficial. It only appears so on the surface.

 

One of the ideas that Sri Aurobindo expressed might be apropos to the ideas brought forth here, both literally as well as figuratively.

The whole world yearns after freedom, yet each creature is in love with his chains; this is the first paradox and inextricable knot of our nature.

...and one of my own,

Every thing seems so simply complicated in it's inherent simplicity.

 

Complicated Simplicity sounds like a good rap title!

Edit: It actually makes a good song title too. It's just inspired me to start working on a new song. Cheers for that Super!

Superliquidsunshine Quote:"The whole world yearns after freedom, yet each creature is in love with his chains".

Personally I wouldn't say that we are "in love with our chains" as such but rather "safe with our chains" as they serve a purpose and to strive for freedom brings a lot of responsibility and hard work! Most people prefer the comfort of the cell they inhabit.

 

Last edited: Sep 28, 2018

"The whole world yearns..." is NOT my quote. That is Sri Aurobindo's wisdom, not mine. The other is mine, the simplicity conundrum.

Glad my post inspired your creativity!

 

Well I am technically an atheist. Unless the majority decide that we made a lot of mistakes, and nature is really the "god" we were attempting to understand. I don't think that is going to happen, but it's become second nature for me (since I began to pay attention to religion about 15 years ago) to judge the wisdom of religious dogma by the test of replacing the word "God" with "nature".
Nature includes...everything (not just what is not made by man here on Earth, but all of the universe(s), known and unknown).
In practical terms it means that if a religious concept or practice conflicts with what we understand of nature, it is a misunderstanding and should be disregarded. Most of the wisdom in religious teachings is about psychology, and some of THAT can actually be in conflict with reality yet is helpful to humans. That aspect is not in conflict with reality or nature, but it points out that we can not rely solely on what we understand about nature/reality but need to remain open and be attentive. Science can inform us but can not tell us what is wise to do (we can't derive an "ought" from an "is"), and religion was not handed to us by some supernatural beings, but emerged from the matrix of human thought and nature's rules. As we evolved, we developed religion and there are solid reasons for that, even if we do not understand all of it.
Many like the idea of doing away with religion because our understanding of nature and psychology is now enough to give all the reasons for why we "ought" to think and act in beneficial ways.. I think, if one DOES understand enough about nature, it is enough, but unfortunately most people don't understand enough. I am not sure I understand enough myself, or at least WOULD HAVE in my formative years for intellectual understanding to be enough influence on my morals and principles. I grew up in a matrix of family behaviors and cultural influences that promoted pretty good attitude towards life and I absorbed it blindly.
Anyway, I still use that test: If it does not align with understanding of nature, it is a misunderstanding altogether.
Why did I write all that? Am I trying to convince you, or to convince myself? Well, each time i write out these ideas I stand a chance of finding flaws, and more so if I expect someone else to critique them. I don't tend to engage in fights, but when I sense a person would be able to critique what i think, i tend to go on and on. Because you talk of "true religion" I think you have your own criteria for religion that most do not. I make a wild guess that you do not go to church and are not a "member" of an established sect. (?)

Yeah. I think it is a mistake in concepts. The idea that we do not have "free will" is ultimately true, scientifically, but "free will" was defined WITHOUT that scientific understanding , so it describes the effect we see of striving within the matrix of genetic predisposition and environment. There IS SOMETHING we do that influences outcome, and we are aware of it and "seem' to have some control.
Whatever THAT is, is "free will". I know at the core we do NOT have control over it, but there is something missing that we argue over, and lack of understanding is no reason to pass a final judgment on a concept. So, I would like someone to figure it out, but i doubt it will be me!
I have gone into that spooky place (some might say religious experience) in thinking deeply about a lot of things, and gotten some good new thoughts to throw into the mix that have changed my overall attitude, but some things seem such a conflict of terms and concepts that the result is just white noise.
Holding all the aspects of everything at once and trying to balance their relative effect to form one idea... It's like there is something wrong in at least one of the tracks, and I can't get a good mix. It seems no one has developed a good plug-in for this "free-will" tune.
Maybe it's my own intellectual studio at fault, but I think those who think they've gotten good mix are just listening on crappy speakers.
When they actually do, we'll all know it. It will be top of the charts forever....

I don't think we have much effect on genetics by our behavior (in the Lamarckian way, although they seem to have revived the idea at a very fine level for something, if i recall right). But certainly we pass along behavior that encourages predispositions. There are times when a person's bad tendencies never emerge due to environment, and times when all the worst potentials are manifested..
I recall and interesting point Jordan Peterson made that: MOST people who are abused do not abuse their children. If they did, there would BE nothing BUT abusers. Most do NOT, and some make a conscious decision to NOT do that to THEIR children.
What we are stuck with is genetics that evolve slowly.

Yes and I think that is a resonable thing to do, but wish we had a system that could rehabilitate people to whatever degree possible
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...

Well i do not think humans were "created" for any purpose, but we certainly "evolved to" "love one another". All life "loves" its offspring in varying degrees (acts in ways to promote its well-being,). In mammals this is very developed and complex, and in humans even more complex due to our intellect (and with unfortunate side-effects, too). Our extreme form of empathy and other emotions in a matrix with our intellect / imagination, gives rise to extreme empathy. These days (in modern cultures) it is both used well and abused horribly.
We are made fools by empathizing with life forms that have no reciprocal capacity (to some degree,reptiles & certainly insects, for example), and worse yet for trees, and rocks... and even for imaginary things ... people in books. I am being harsh just to make a point. It is GREAT we have the capacity to feel for other life and even for objects, real and imaginary.
But it is a double-edged sword. The same capacity to feel for others by imagining what hurts, allows us to hurt others in ways simpler life forms can't. We torture each other both physically and mentally, and there much less of that going on with other life. Although "bullying" is obvious within groups, and individuals may suffer a lifetime of being dominated by others, it is not done with the same intellectual intent as with humans, and why we invented the word "evil". Our degree of intelligence is the prerequisite for an action to be deemed "evil" and the capacity for it is what we deem "evil". It is not something supernatural, but all too natural ... for humans.
-----------------------
I saved your reply to go over later. There are always things neglected when replying.
When just reading without intent to reply... things have a different impact.
Oh, and I could not get this to include what I said (to keep in context), so i pasted in parenthesis.
I am about to post, so here goes the test to see if it turns into some code or something...

 

Interesting to see how a thread like this developes!

Basic line: Take care of your kids

 

Last edited: Sep 28, 2018

I know that you where just repeating Sri Aurobindo's quote but to repeat and enter it into your post would suggest that you hold a certain belief in the quote that you entered! I reckon that he was a very wise man and i personally stand by his wise words. I just reckon that in today's modern world his quotes can be manipulated to fit with the modern agenda!
I have the beginning 2 verses and a chorus of a 70's sounding song based on that initial quote. I took a couple of words and put them together to make "Complicated Simplicity" and it works! Cheers Super

 

Wow! That took a lot of concentration to read but it was worth it! Very interesting.

 

I wish I could feel pity for him, especially since, like most everybody else here, I grew up with his comedy. The standup albums, "I Spy", "Fat Albert", "The Cosby Show" ... hell, I remember when he was a regular on "The Electric Company". And while his punishment seems a bit harsh for an eighty-year-old man, consider that he was completely free for the last eighty years. These allegations first came up in the Seventies and Eighties and were dismissed because Cosby was a celebrity. A millionaire serial rapist got to run around unchecked for decades while also being a beloved entertainer. He went to court over the Costand thing waaaay back in 2006 and bought his way out of it. His image really wasn't even tarnished until a couple of years ago, when the allegations finally started being taken seriously. He got to live a full life at the top of his game and with all the respect and wealth a huge celebrity could have. Does it matter that it's being taken away now?

And by the way, it's not like he's actually going to serve serious time in prison. Considering his age and state of health, it would be a wonder if he spent more than six months in the clink. And even if he serves out his three-year minimum, it's not like they're sending him to Oz and throwing him into general population. I imagine it will end up being more like hospice with bars on the doors and windows.

 

Reminds me of "simplexity", both a concept, and a book I listened to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplexity

 

The fact that it took YOU a lot of concentration seems an indication that i am not writing well