I know it’s a shitpost, but the idea behind something like this is counter to the point of rehabilitation. Civilization should move towards rehabilitation instead of punishment as the idea is that you want to integrate someone back into society. I am not sure inducing trauma and mental damage is conducive to rehabilitation.
Even though participants remembered their own falls as having taken one-third longer than those of the other study participants, they were not able to see more events in time. Instead, the longer duration was a trick of their memory, not an actual slow-motion experience.
Your memory is imperfect. But your actual capacity to perceive time is still limited by the facilities you use for that prescription.
After the attorneys for both sides finished their dog and pony show, the judge himself made each of us answer the following question:
What is the purpose of criminal incarceration?
A - Punishment
B - Deterrence
C - Rehabilitation
After all seventy five of us had answered, all of us who responded with anything other than punishment were dismissed. Even those who answered a combination of the choices. Nope. Punishment was the only correct answer.
To my amusement, this barely left enough people available to fill the jury box.
I followed the case. Guy robbed a convenience store. No death. No injury. Got fifty nine years.
I know it’s a shitpost, but the idea behind something like this is counter to the point of rehabilitation. Civilization should move towards rehabilitation instead of punishment as the idea is that you want to integrate someone back into society. I am not sure inducing trauma and mental damage is conducive to rehabilitation.
Its counter to our understanding of entropy. Brains simply don’t work like this.
Can you elaborate?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071211233934.htm
Your memory is imperfect. But your actual capacity to perceive time is still limited by the facilities you use for that prescription.
One experimental result does not define the entire domain of consciousness.
You are essentially making a statement of the form “X does not and cannot exist”, which is always a logical fallacy.
So I was on a jury pool in December.
After the attorneys for both sides finished their dog and pony show, the judge himself made each of us answer the following question:
What is the purpose of criminal incarceration?
A - Punishment
B - Deterrence
C - Rehabilitation
After all seventy five of us had answered, all of us who responded with anything other than punishment were dismissed. Even those who answered a combination of the choices. Nope. Punishment was the only correct answer.
To my amusement, this barely left enough people available to fill the jury box.
I followed the case. Guy robbed a convenience store. No death. No injury. Got fifty nine years.