Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Garth Sundem | April 6th 2009 06:00 AM | 21 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More The Geeks' Guide to World Domination articles

All

About Garth Sundem

Do you need a Monday morning shot of geekery?

If so, you've come to the right place. Every Monday, early, I'll drop splendid geekery from the fields of physics, math, computer science, zoology


... Full Bio

As an ethical hedonist, the 18th-19th-century English utilitarian philosopher and proto-bleeding-heart-liberal Jeremy Bentham, believed that right and wrong could be determined by weighing the “pleasures” and “pains” of any given action, with an action that produced more pleasure than pain being morally right.

While this would be great by itself (in a geeky kind of way), what makes it truly spectacular is the fact that Bentham actually created an algorithm to define exactly how much pleasure and pain an action would cause. (His application of algebra to life decisions is echoed by at least one complete whack-job modern author…)

To determine an individual’s pleasure or pain from an action, Bentham suggested weighing Intensity (pleasure’s strength), Duration (how long pleasure would last), Certainty (the probability action will result in pleasure), Propinquity (how soon the pleasure might occur), Fecundity (the chance the pleasure would result in further actions), and Purity (the probability these further actions would be pleasures and not pains). He also added Extent, taking into account the effects of said decision on other people.

We can only guess at the specific algebra Bentham used to compare these variables and he left no note of how to quantify, for example, intensity of pleasure, but in Bentham’s day he envisioned his hedonistic calculus used for many decisions, including calculating jail sentences: given a certain crime, Bentham thought it possible to determine the punishment that would outweigh the crime’s pleasure and thus prevent future crimes.

Interestingly, Bentham's thinking about prisons didn't stop at sentencing length. He also designed the prison known as the Panopticon, in which prisoners in open cells at all times feel as if they are being watched by guards in a central tower. To Bentham, the Panopticon allowed guards to gain "power of mind" over the prisoners. Here's his design:

Panopticon


Join me every Monday morning for more grandtastic goodies from The Geeks' Guide to World Domination. Or if you like your geekery delivered fresh, consider subscribing to my rss feed or joining my Facebook Fan Page.

Comments

logicman's picture
Isn't it strange how so many otherwise enlightened people have designed positively cruel punishments for prisoners.

In the grounds of Lincoln Castle, UK, is a victorian chapel which is open to the public.  It is positively claustrophobic.  For each prisoner, there is a small cubicle with a door.  After a prisoner entered a cubicle its door would be closed.  There is a sloping roof over each cubicle and a sloping bench to sit on.  The chapel was specifically designed to prevent prisoners from talking to each other and to prevent them falling asleep.

There are some photos on flickr by Lincolnian.  When I was in Lincoln the woodwork was a nasty bluish green-grey  paint.  I think the bright varnishwork is for the benefit of tourists.  Certainly, as I tried the experiment of shutting myself into one of these cubicles, I felt sorry for the wretches who had to endure the claustrophobia and the drabness of their lives whilst being talked at on the topics of ethics and morality.

"Blow, blow, thou winter wind ..."   Shakespeare.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Unfortunately no one seems to have actually figured out what they want the penitenary system to achieve.  There's talk of punishment, rehabilitation, protecting society from dangerous people, etc. but in general, there is no actual defined objective or rationale for how people are sentenced.

Punishment seems the weakest of those I mentioned only because it is a "one size fits all" approach that is bound to fail.  Writing a bad check is hardly in the same category as murdering five people, and yet they are essentially bound to the same punishment. 

It certainly makes sense to suggest that dangerous people should be removed from society, but once that happens, it appears that we still don't know what to do with them.

Rehabilitation seems downright silly, so I won't even bother with the logic that makes someone think that they can re-engineer individuals in such a setting.

All in all, it seems like it is an amateurish state of affairs when it comes to dealing with crimes and social punishment.  All one has to do is witness the media feeding frenzy around someone like Bernie Madoff.   To suggest jail time just seems pathetic.  It seems to me that the best punishment for someone like him is to simply seize all his assets.  What harm if he wanders around society, but why should he be allowed to enjoy any economic benefits from his activities? 

Some might argue that there are too many innocent people that might be peripherally injured by such an action, but there is nothing that suggests they are any more entitled to fraudulent funds than he is.  They certainly aren't barred from working or doing whatever in their power to maintain themselves, so I don't have a problem in seizing all the ill-gotten assets from them either.  You can bet, that no one would care if the assets were the results of drug smuggling, so why should this matter?  (In short, I'm suggesting economic banishment with appropriate punishments for those that would help him).

In a sense, I'm just tired of using the threat of jail-time as an overall solution, when we already know that it doesn't make a bit of difference and why should we waste additional tax-payer dollars simply because our judiciary (and government) are too unimaginative to think of appropriate punishments.

Hank's picture
Becky Jungbauer is apparently too shy to tell you herself but ... the Playlist section in March 2009's Wired has a certain Scientific Blogging contributor's book at #2 on the list.   Who knew Wired was trying to be good again???


Becky Jungbauer's picture
Congrats, Garth! :)

Gerhard Adam's picture
Congratulations Garth!

Stellare's picture
From what I've read of bits and pieces of your work Garth, it looks hilarious. But please tell me YOU ARE NOT ATTACKING THE METRIC SYSTEM?!?! I can get more than theoretical about physics when it comes to metrics. And nobody is getting nowhere by mentioning any kind of prisons. Bentham or no Bentham. :-)

Hank's picture
 But please tell me YOU ARE NOT ATTACKING THE METRIC SYSTEM?!?!

If he isn't, I will.  Any time Napoleon has to undo the dumb decisions of the French Revolution, they have really screwed up.   Unfortunately he missed the metric system.   I get why French people are jealous of Brits - hey, I wish I had invented blood pudding too - but inventing a new calendar with a 10 day week?   Puh-leeze.

Back to the metric system, it is no more valid than standard, since the basis of it was a measurement, one ten-millionth of the span from the north pole to the equator, they got wrong - in other words, it is just as arbitrary as British units.

Plus, being French they didn't even know Englishman John Wilkins beat them to it in 1668.

How did I do?   :)

P.S.  Buy his book.   Why would you tell the guy you haven't read any of his books??   Maybe we should have a contest so someone can win a copy.   What do you all think?

Becky Jungbauer's picture
I'm in!

Stellare's picture
It is only the US and one other country (I haven't triple checked that info) that refuses to accept the S.I and metric system. And I am ready to fight every single one of your citizens defending this universal standard.

In this case the US is behaving like a stubborn spoiled child and not as a responsible superpower. Hey, maybe not accepting the metric system is the reason why the US's powers are diminishing? :-)

Ok, bring it on! I'm a Viking! hahahaha




1 kg - this is how it looks!



logicman's picture
Archaeologists discover prehistoric standards laboratory at Gobekli Tepi.
Remains of a clinker built ship with copper wire fastenings have caused great controversy.
Is it Noah's ark?
Did Vikings invent the measuring system?
Was this really the Garden of Eden?

Are these theories a complete load of ballast?



Becky Jungbauer's picture
Being from Minnesota, I can claim some association with Vikings, whether it be the sports team or the Kensington Runestone or the various populations, colleges (St. Olaf, for example) and customs derived from Norse ancestry. But I'd be on your side anyway when it comes to the S.I and metric system - whether it makes sense in the great cosmic sense of mathematics, I don't know, but it certainly makes more sense than our crazy system.

logicman's picture
"Maybe we should have a contest so someone can win a copy.   What do you all think?"

Oh yes!  Provided it has a category for an entire replacement for the S.I. system using only common pebbles and wood.
:)

Gerhard Adam's picture
I'm definitely in ....

Hank's picture
We're going to start a contest the week of May 4th, which means I have to get some stuff added in to article creation by then (no pressure) because if it's a contest on a science site, it has to involve questions and answers and scoring.

Becky Jungbauer's picture
And stats and lots of graphs. With colors.

logicman's picture
"And stats and lots of graphs. With colors."

And balloons, and lots of candies, and cookies, and ...

don't worry folks - it's called senility - you may safely ignore me.  :)

Hank's picture
Well, for now we have to limit it to things we can do inside articles - we can do just polls pretty easily, it's multiple Q&A that is funky to think about.   But I will work on that cookie thing.   That is gold, I tell you!




Fossil Huntress's picture
And balloons, and lots of candies, and cookies, and ...

You can pursuade with a hammer in a velvet glove or loads and loads of cookies. Personally, I like both options. ; )

Fossil Huntress's picture


Looking forward to seeing Garth rise to #1 and seeing him win the hearts and minds of TV viewers everywhere April 30th. Is Julie Chen fickle or is she just good at building anticipation?

p.s love the contest idea. Need to plan a chart wth a crazy quilt of colors! The chart here in blue clearly explains the P-value from a skateboarding experiment.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.