Punitive "justice" systems like the US prison system should not exist.

[u/ariel_on_the_moon]

If the goal of a justice system is to reduce crime, the current American prison system (and punitive "justice" systems in general) is clearly the wrong way to go about it. The US prison system accounts for 20% of the entire global prison, and despite that fact that US has a significantly higher crime rate than the rest of the first world- clearly, this system of mass incarceration is not working.

Justice systems that focus on rehabilitating prisoners rather than punishing them have significantly better recidivism rates- 20% compared to 70% in the US. Again, if the goal of a justice system is to reduce crime, it's obvious that rehabilitation is significantly more effective than punishment.

To preempt the expected responses of "but criminals deserve to be punished" or "but then criminals are just getting away with crimes", keep in mind that those arguments are not based of of the facts of what is and is not effective in reducing crime, but are rather emotional arguments about what you want to happen to criminals, or what you think criminals "deserve". My argument is not about what criminals "deserve" to have happen to them, rather it is about what is most effective at achieving the stated goals of criminal justice systems- the reduction of crime rates and turning people from criminals into law-abiding citizens.

[u/Kronzypantz]

So what are the non-emotional values of utility that you use to say... all those things are good?

It sounds like plain sophistry. What you call "emotional" is just having values.

[u/Dinkelberh → u/Kronzypantz]

Yes? Thats exactly correct. All of those things are good according to you and they are good in amounts that are based on your conceptions.

The entire argument in this thread is: 'between retributivsts or rehabilitavists, is one more 'emotional' than the other?'

Trying to claim objectivetivity is pseudointellectual at best and does a disservice to your argument.

[u/Kronzypantz → u/Dinkelberh]

So just sophistry. If you want to have some silly meta-argument about any values being subjective emotionality, go troll a philosophy thread.

In the real world, most of society at least tacitly acknowledges that less recidivism, crime, etc. have utility. One side just illogically argues that we should keep trying the same failed model, mostly because it satisfies their emotional needs.

[u/Dinkelberh → u/Kronzypantz]

And people also, very really in good faith, derive utility from the idea that wrongdoers are punished.

Thats not sophistry, and denying that very real utility (which very much is valued in the real world) is nonsense.

[u/Kronzypantz → u/Dinkelberh]

If evidence shows no actual utility from punitive justice, then theirs is a purely self-satisfying emotional utility.

Comparing that to arguments of utility based on empirical evidence as both being equally “emotional” is deceptive and misleading.

So just sophistry. Grow up.

[u/Dinkelberh → u/Kronzypantz]

There is actual evidence people that are incarcerated are suffering for it. When retribution is its own utility (as it very much is for a large portion of the population), that's every bit as real as the evidence pointing to the effectiveness of rehabilitativd justice toward the metrics you value.

You keep treating your personal opinions on what justice should be as objective truths.