What many people do is find ways to get around the penal system in order to get what they want. In fact, some get great satisfaction in just seeing if they can beat the system and not get caught.
joe: That's true. But then that undermines your position.
peacegirl: Where does it undermine my position? I am talking about a world without blame and punishment where people will not be able to beat the system, because there will be no system to beat.
But you would have a conscience.
joe: Only after the new system came into place. But if there are enough people without consciences, then the new system wouldn't come into place at all.
peacegirl: We are all born with a conscience, but our environment can weaken it. When the new conditions of the environment are put into place, there is no way one's conscience can manipulate or take advantage of a good thing.
joe: Do you have some sort of problem with identifying Lessans by name? Are you ashamed of him?
peacegirl: No, I just don't like the spiders in the search engines to pick up everything I write.
peacegirl wrote: No Joe. That's not what he is saying. If you had just read the book you wouldn't have this question.
joe: I don't plan on reading the book unless you can provide a compelling enough summary that would make me want to read it.
peacegirl: I am trying to pique your interest, but if I can't, what can I say? You win some and you lose some. It would be your loss, not mine, because this knowledge not only talks about a new world; it helps people in this world as well.
peacegirl wrote: The hurt to the one who is hungry is a first blow, so this action on his part would be justified and his conscience would permit the theft. Only when something is a first blow; something that is done to gain at someone else's expense, will conscience be affected and not permit the action because it would be unjustifiable.
joe: That doesn't make any sense. He would be justified in striking the first blow but then he wouldn't be justified? Which is it?
peacegirl: He would be justified to steal if he could find no food any other way. This would be a justifiable hurt to someone else. Does that make sense?
Of course sociopaths exist, but you can't even begin to project the power of this law of our nature.
peacegirl: This natural law is not selective. It has the power to prevent people from desiring to hurt others. Therefore, in the new world there will be no psychopaths or sociopaths. I know this is hard to believe, but it's true, except for those rare instances where someone is so sick that this law has no effect. They would then have to be taken off the streets, just as they are today. But mental illness will be virtually non-existent in the new world.
peacegirl wrote: Also, when the causes that led to a person to become a psychopath or a sociopath will no longer be. Even those children who may be born with a predisposition to lash out when hurt, will be prevented. Just like someone may have a predisposition to a certain illness, doesn't mean it will automatically manifest itself. It takes a combination of environmental and hereditary factors for it to become a full blown disease.
joe: Are you suggesting that sociopathy is due solely to environmental factors?
peacegirl: Yes, the propensity to become a sociopath could be present but it will never be triggered in an environment such as the one described.
Inductive reasoning because it is a psychological law that applies to everyone, just like one plus one equals two can be counted on no matter what two items you are being added together.
joe: There's no such thing as an inductive "law," at least in the sense that it admits of no possible exceptions. That's especially true of psychology. But then, as I mentioned before, if Lessans is wrong about his assumptions regarding human nature, then his entire philosophical system is wrong.
peacegirl: I didn't say an 'inductive law.' I said a psychological law that is based on inductive reasoning and astute observation.