4-Jul-12 Should criminals be pardoned?

This coming Wednesday, we will be discussing whether convicted criminals should be pardoned after serving their sentence.
 

This is a link to the Policy manual of the Parole Board of Canada, citing the conditions for pardoning someone who served their sentence.

http://pbc-clcc.gc.ca/infocntr/policym/polman-eng.shtml#annex_a1

In looking at the eligibility table for pardon applications, it lists the time period after which applications for pardon can be submitted.  This includes serious personal injury offenses that required imprisonment of 2 years or more which requires a 10 year waiting period.

Does this mean that even serious criminals can apply for a pardon after a 10 year wait?

What are the chances that their pardon will be granted ?

It would be great if those of you out there that may be more familiar with the parole and pardon system can shed more light on this, or better still, come join us at the discussion!

Quite apart from the particular details of the Canadian system of granting pardons,  it is interesting to discuss how we should deal with those among us that have broken the rules we set up for our society.

On the one side, we have portions of the society that feel that criminal records should be permanent.  After all, what is the use of a criminal record that can be erased or concealed when criminal record checks are used to prevent these previous transgressors from taking up positions that involve trust with children, significant assets, or other forms of public trust?

We also have people that would rather have "criminals" be thrown behind bars forever and would even favor capital punishment as a way of getting rid of the problem.

On the other side, we have the argument that we should be reforming rather than punishing, that we should be aiming at reintroducing these "criminals" to become productive member of society.
http://www.pardons.org/about_us.html

But what of the safety risk to the rest of society in attempting these reforms and do reform always work?

Are there "hard-core" criminals that are not reformable?  What do we do with them and how do we decide who they are?

From the general public's everyday life perspective,  is criminal record a good indication of a person's character and reliability?

Is the absence or presence of a criminal record too much of a black and white test that put too much petty crimes in the black category?

If so, how do we introduce a better criteria?

It is often said that forgiveness is the victim's power to take charge and release itself of its victimized status.  Without forgiveness, the wound cannot heal and the victim remains a victim.

When and under what circumstances should we forgive and forget without being naive about it?



Come Wednesday and join our discussion!

27-Jun-12 The morality of choosing a child's genetic characteristics

This coming Wednesday at the Ideas Cafe,  we are going to discuss whether we should participate in the choosing of our children's genetic characteristics.

There is evidence that there is a statistical bias for birth rate of male babies, especially after the first born, and especially among immigrant families from cultures that favor males.

 

For women looking to artificial insemination, there are commercial sperm banks offering choices of sperms from famous university graduates, good looks, and other desirable characteristics.

 

 http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=52e43aa6-b15c-423f-a845-13a845143e70&k=9062

In the case of using ultra sound scans to determine the gender of the fetus, then going through with an abortion if the parents were looking for a different gender, there is the argument of wasting a potential life to gender selection.

However, in the case of the choice of sperm from the sperm bank for artificial insemination, the question is purely should we choose at all when the natural reproduction process involve no such choices.

 

Not that there is no choice at all in the conventional process of mate selection.

Healthy, intelligent people with good family background or abundant resources are already prized candidates for mate selection so choice is subtly built in to the selection of our children.

So, should we choose at the sperm bank?

If so, should we take a more radical step and choose a surrogate female for the quality of her egg?

Or should we let randomness and mutation take its course to give us pleasant as well as nasty surprises?

Who should be deciding on what sperm and egg should get together?

If we look at the animal and horticultural side,  breeders routinely improve on their breed to get the characteristics most desired by their customers.

 

Who is the "customer" for the human race?

Is the lack of this "customer" and ultimate decision maker the reason why we should leave the choice to randomness?

To go the other direction,  is it unethical to select life mates on the basis of them being better parents or genetic characteristics?

Are we currently going halfway in making this choice, but uncomfortable in going further with new technology just because we are creatures of habit ? 

Why stop at genetic characteristics,  is it unethical to choose someone to be a partner because this person is a "good provider" for the family?  Maybe we should let the challenges of life mold the next generation.

Finally,  there is unconscious choice.  We may be choosing our mates based on smells indicating the difference of their genes from ours

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/6/l_016_08.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/6/real/l_016_08.html

And we think we know what we are doing?

Let's hear your ideas this coming Wednesday!

13-Jun-12 Is advertising brainwashing or informing us?

This coming Wednesday, we will be discussing the role of advertising in our lives at the Ideas Cafe.

Does advertising add colour and interest in our lives or are these subtle and not so subtle attempts to make us buy something?

There are those who think we are subliminally manipulated.  http://www.subliminal-message.info/  (are real life ads this suggestive???)

There are messages of sex and other forbidden desires encoded in how ice cubes, drink cans, logos, etc are arranged in drink commercials.  http://www.11points.com/Food-Drink/11_Hidden_Messages_In_Food_Ads_and_Logos

Are these warnings of subliminal manipulations overblown conspiracy theories or are we really moved by these suggestions?

Are the companies sponsoring these ads not concerned about the backlash from being exposed of manipulating?  Do they know what is going on or is it just the advertising agency's way of getting an effective ad without telling the sponsoring companies?

Are we informed by the offering from the merchants? or are we unconsciously biased by these loaded messages while other valid, valuable ideas are left undiscovered because there is no commercial interest behind it?

In a way, advertising is no different than what lobbyist do with politicians and the general public in trying to shape the future of policies.

Are the publicity tactics of groups like Green Peace a form of advertising?

Advertisers and lobbyist are special interest groups with their own reasons for promoting the message they present to others.

How would we have adopted the microwave oven, cell phones, environmental awareness, and many other changes in recent years without advertising?

We have accepted many forms of "freebies" in our daily lives as a way to benefit both the advertiser and the consumer.  Kind of a synergy to use a well used word.

We enjoy "free" television and radio while putting up with their advertising content as paid satellite radio and government supported radio are struggling.  We use "free" insurance agent and investment advisers that are paid by insurance company and financial investments that we buy.

Is this a pact with the devil or the way to kill two birds with one stone?

Now let's look at the other side.

If you have a great idea that will benefit mankind,  how are you going to communicate this to the rest of the world most efficiently?  By words of mouth? waiting for the world to beat a path to your door?

Is advertising and lobbying not just an attempt at accelerating how we communicate to others?  There is no compulsory adoption being applied.

http://www.adcracker.com/techniques/Advertising_Techniques.htm

As to manipulation of the messages,  is this not a part of the characteristic of a free world where we try to minimise censorship so that many voices can be heard?

Is it not up to us to separate the valuable message from the noise out there?

For each of us to decide what is a good idea and what is not?  That one person's good idea is another person's awful idea?

It seems an awful price to have to pay to be ever vigilant on our own against the cheats, computer virus, misleading information, and aggressive advertising out there just so that we can have a "free" society where everyone is allowed to express their opinion.

Or would we rather have some central authority censor and forbid information and advertising it deem not for the public good?

As an aid towards arming ourselves against advertisers and special interest group messages,  you may be interested in this.  http://www.slideshare.net/kjhatzi/common-advertising-strategies  (just ignore the advertising that sponsor this!)

6-Jun-12 Can there be purpose without desire?

Last week at the Ideas Cafe, we discussed detachment versus engagement.  Whether we can have both or know when to do one or the other.

The discussion led to the concept of System 1 and System 2 proposed by Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow".  System 1 is like intuition and the emotional take on things; fast and sometimes faulty judgements are formed from some unknown experiences in the past.  System 2 is the rational and analytical side, takes time and effort but provide consistent judgements from similar inputs.

Mano's take is that instead of choosing between detachment and engagement, we should have system 2, the rational side of us, constantly watching system 1, the emotional side.  We can be engaged through system 1 but system 2 should always be alert and on the lookout for those fast, confident, but wrong judgements made by system 1.

This week,  let's look at purpose and desire.

Purpose is what gives our life direction, a reason to do something, motivation to get out of bed and to endure temporary hardship and inconveniences, just so that we can reach a goal that we desire.

Some would even say that purpose is what give meaning to life.

So purpose is a good thing.  We should not be drifting through life but have a sense of purpose in what we do.

Desire, on the other hand, is the longing for something that we want.  While often used in hedonistic terms for food, drink, and sex, it is nevertheless aimed at satisfaction of what we wanted.

How is that different than the drive to reach towards a particular goal or purpose in life?

Is it the targets that differentiate purpose in the high brow heaven while casting desire in the low brow devilish territory?

Or is it the single-mindedness that characterize desire versus the measured steps taken towards reaching our purpose?

In the spirit of last week's discussion,  should we have system 2 pick the purpose for us through rational analysis but have system 1 motivate us as we see progress towards our goal?

Should system 2 pick the goal and let system 1 provide the passion?

Do we get to tell what system 1 should do if it seems to decide quickly and have a mind of its own?

Let's hear your ideas on Wednesday.