An Open Question on Punishment

In the Genealogy of Morality, Nietzshe talks on punishment in the past as being something that made the people feel good, how it brought them joy to see. This seems to be the case even today. All be it the system is different; we no longer draw and quarter, or boil people in oil, the judicial system does seem to have the same function as those systems of old. That is to make people feel better.
This function also seems to work in a way in which it maintains peoples trust in what they, at least perceive as being an ordered society. Without the punishment people may come to think that anything could be done to themselves or their property, in a sense to their very sovereign nature, without having some kind of recourse toward that action.
Plainly: the use of punishment, or in the modern era, the judicial system, makes people feel better about things. That while there has been an infringement in the social order, the order has been reestablished and those that have harmed it have been dealt with in one way or another.
So while we don't have hangings, or boiling of people, at celebrations during the inauguration of our or President which reenforce the peoples belief in the power of the state, we do still have a system that supports it and makes people feel good that what they see as being wrong has been punished.
So there is a question, at what point, if there is one, does the function of punishment stop being a means to reassure the public, and becomes a way of mollify or blind the public to those injustices that are not being punished? Furthermore, is there a point at which the system/function of punishment stop serving to the people/society but rather begins to serve itself?

Comments

  1. Thought and ThesisApril 21, 2010 at 3:02 PM

    Let me add and say that while it does not seem that Nietzsche brings it up, this tendency of what he calls aristocratic punishment does not seemed to have changed much with the rise of Judo-Christian morals.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Religious States

     A question has always vexed me concerning the ways in which we pick and choose the states we support in the Middle East. Outside of the clear self-serving economic reasons that lead us into support oppressive dictatorships and monarchs, while at the same time talking about spreading democracy, we seem to have at least one state that we support not only because it is a democracy, but also because of its religious affiliation. The state that I speak of is Israel.      Now let me come out right up front and say that I am not against the Israel being a state. Nor am I against the Israel people, or the Jewish people that make up a majority of the citizens of that state. In fact, of the being three western monotheistic religions, I think that Judaism is the most pure and natural of the three.      What I am against is the United States being in support of Israel as a Jewish state. This stance has for to long pitted us against other Middle Eastern states and organizations that have ver
Read more

Philosophical Assumptions & Comment

In preparing my next post, 'The Moral Vote', it occurred to me that at the root of my conversations I will draw upon language that may not be universal. The philosophical language of ethics, political theory, epistemology, etc., may not be widely understood by all readers.  Wherefore, with a desire to remain as concise as possible, I have made the decision to not define, in brief or otherwise, the terms and language that will be used throughout these posts. To that end I will make the assumption the language is understood. In those instances where it is not, I take that it is for the reader to acquaint ones self with those terms that are not understood. Comment: It is often tempting to feel the deep passion of a news event and have the desire to comment on it as soon as possible. I am not immune to the pull of these passions. Assuredly, I have made many rants elsewhere concerning my joy or displeasure about an event. Here I will endeavor to avoid such comments. 
Read more

Racism, Sexism, and Critical Theory

So its been a really, really long time since I have posted anything. But, while writing this post for a class I decided to share it to a broader audience. So here it is.  While reading about race in chapter 10 I started thinking about the links in Marxism that lead to issues presented in the chapter.  It is my belief that racism, as well as sexism, has become inexorably linked to the market economy. I will prove this, in breif, in the following way, and then make the link toward education.  For the market economy of the nation to exist there is a need for there to be a percentage of the population to be under-employed or unemployed. By maintaing this percentage the market is able to keep wages down due to the competition between working age individuals. If the percentage gets to low the companies will be forced to pay more to attach workers, thus cutting profits. This maintaining of under and unemployed percentage plays a role in the alienation that occurs within the market. The
Read more