People seek, in such a deep sense, the desire for retribution over errs and heresy.

I have felt a desire for vengeance.

Why is punishment so satisfying?

Speaking in evolutionary terms, I suspect that the emotional satisfaction associated from seeking retribution evolved as a mechanism for preventing individuals from being exploited by others. Generally speaking, a "bad actor" will think twice about harming someone who is likely to seek retribution.

“What is the deeper point towards punishment”? — In my opinion, “negative reinforcement”; by associating something negative, or undesirable, with a given act, one will, usually, cease to commit that action due to their aversion of the consequences accompanying it. Very simply put, the dog learns to stop going to the bathroom in the house only ‘cause of its aversion to the negative consequences accompanying such an act, e.g., shouting, being put in a cage or timeout, spanking, etc.,; without that, it would continue in its way without any inhibition.

Speaking in evolutionary terms, I suspect that the emotional satisfaction associated from seeking retribution evolved as a mechanism for preventing individuals from being exploited by others — Theorem

There seems more to it than that, in my view. I think of punishment as a relic of evolutionary rudimentary psychology. Ask me why.

In my opinion, “negative reinforcement”; by associating something negative, or undesirable, with a given act, one will, usually, cease to commit that action due to their aversion of the consequences accompanying it. — aRealidealist

But, does this have to be demonstrated in act only?

Why?

When someone does something wrong, we feel as though they should be punished. What is the deeper point towards punishment if everyone mostly feels it is wrong. — Shawn

Everyone doesn't think it's wrong. The deeper point for it, and for all you want to know and more and retributive justice:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-retributive/

Why? — Theorem

Animals punish each-other without end. It's so typical that's it's almost primitive...

Everyone doesn't think it's wrong. — Hanover

You accept punishment, willingly?

”But, does this have to be demonstrated in act only?” —... for beings without a higher cognition, like dogs or other animals, I would say, yes. For example, you can’t explain, in principle, to a dog why going to the bathroom in the house is bad, e.g., due to germs/potential illnesses from it, uncleanliness, odor, so one can only execute a demonstrable negative consequence in action, as a response to their undesirable behavior, if you want to establish a negative association in their minds, which should arouse their aversion or inhibition to committing that action again.

Yet for beings of a higher cognition, like humans past adolescence, not necessarily. For example, the consequence of “hell” or an “underworld” is indemonstrable on earth, it as an ultimate consequence to certain kinds of actions cannot be demonstrated on earth; & yet it has prevented plenty of people from committing certain kinds of actions due to the conceived or imagined threat of it, even if its consequence has never been demonstrated to follow from those certain kinds of actions.

So, in my opinion, negative consequences have to be demonstrated in response to undesirable behaviors for beings without a higher cognition; yet not necessarily for beings with a higher cognition, as they can conceive or imagine of certain kinds of consequences without these actually ever being demonstrated as such.

So, in my opinion, negative consequences have to be demonstrated in response to undesirable behaviors for beings without a higher cognition; yet not necessarily for beings with a higher cognition, as they can conceive or imagine of certain kinds of consequences without these actually ever being demonstrated as such. — aRealidealist

Yes.

https://gph.is/Zfh9X7

LOL :lol:

LOL :lol: — aRealidealist

How do you explain behavior that takes place in spite of understatement of its negative consequence for both parties involved?

If you can you give an example of such a scenario, I’m sure that I’d be able to better answer your question.

If you can you give example of such a scenario, I’m sure that I’d be able to better answer your question. — aRealidealist

A theft? A murder? By definition, any *crime*.

Ok. but what function does punishment play among animals? Presumably it provides some utility or it wouldn't have evolved. The question, then, becomes whether it provides any utility within the realm of human society and culture, or whether it can safely be discarded. For my part, I'm not convinced it can be discarded because I do think the threat of punishment deters many people from doing terrible things. That said, I think some temperaments respond better to punishment than others, and so the use of punishment could be better modulated within society than it currently is.

The question, then, becomes whether it provides any utility within the realm of human society and culture, or whether it can safely be discarded. — Theorem

My assumption, is that it can be disposed with, but... unfortunately, things will be acted upon, and unfortunately, have to be dealt with. I just think that re-distributive justice has taken an extreme form lately.

What you are perceiving as "punishment" may not be primarily a punishment.

If a person murders and is sent to prison...is that "punishment" or is it simply removal from society in order to protect those the offender has not already murdered?

If a person murders and is sent to prison...is that "punishment" or is it simply removal from society in order to protect those the offender has not already murdered? — Frank Apisa

Good question. I think it's perceived as punishment in the least, to every party involved. Whilst, the act may be intended towards different consequences.

Punishment seems to spring from anger to me.

Punishment seems to spring from anger to me. — Andrew4Handel

And what else, resentment? I can't stand the idea honestly.

It might also come from the just world fallacy and the fundamental attribution error where people subconsciously believe life is fair and people are to blame when things go wrong.

I do think people can be malicious can be to blame but I still don't want to harm another person as retribution.

It might also come from the just world fallacy and the fundamental attribution error where people subconsciously believe life is fair and people are to blame when things go wrong.

I do think people can be malicious can be to blame but I still don't want to harm another person as retribution. — Andrew4Handel

I think you're onto something. Do go on.

I think the US is so incredibly obsessed with punishment, that I'm honest to God afraid for people who make mistakes in it.

I guess that I would it explain by saying that the perpetrator doesn’t view/experience the consequence as being something negative, or just doesn’t know, ahead of time, what negative consequence(s) will accompany his action(s), i.e., either by impudence or ignorance.

For example, one steals another’s car & sells it, now they may not view/experience this as being something negative but rather positive ‘cause of how it monetarily benefited them, so they’ll proceed in committing such a “criminal action”; but, say, if they were to get arrested & lose more money in legal fees than they originally gained by selling that stolen car, which wasn’t expected, & if they were to knew that this would’ve happened ahead of time, then they most likely wouldn’t have committed such an action in the first place.

So, I guess, that’s how I would explain a perpetrator’s crime in relation to an either unexpressed or understated negative consequence; either in it not being not something which is viewed/experienced as expressly negative, i.e., impudence, or in it not being known that something negative will be a consequence of it, i.e., ignorance.

I feel that punishment comes from peoples fear including a fear of lacking control in an uncertain world. People attempt to make the world seem more just by inventing a system of values and justice to validate their actions and beliefs.

I believe that it is pathological and artificial.

Some of it has been informed by religion and superstition and enforced by those with the most power to justify their power or simply hold onto it.

So, I guess, that’s how I would explain a perpetrator’s crime in relation to an either unexpressed or understated negative consequence; either in it not being not something which is viewed/experienced as expressly negative, i.e., impudence, or in it not being known that something negative will be a consequence of it, i.e., ignorance. — aRealidealist

Is it really the experience, or knowledge or lack-thereof? If people knew how many people actually DON'T get away with crimes, things would shift so dramatically.

People attempt to make the world seem more just by inventing a system of values and justice to validate their actions and beliefs. — Andrew4Handel

Oh my fucking God, what a travesty. If I die, it will be with a smile on my face that this world was corrupted by the insane.

When someone does something wrong, we feel as though they should be punished. — Shawn

Who is this we? And what is wrong? And this desire to punish, is that the only reason it happens?

Life punishes us. The choices we make come back to us hard and fast. It is a luxury if one can buffer the results. But nobody rides free.

Life punishes us. The choices we make come back to us hard and fast. It is a luxury if one can buffer the results. But nobody rides free. — Valentinus

What a bunch of baloney. Life punishes us? Really? What does that even mean?