[MD] Social Ants?

[Ham Priday]

Hi Platt, et al  --

You know, I've been thinking about criminology as related to a 'values'
column I put together a few weeks ago.  The gist of my idea is that, if
behavior is directed by one's perception of value, then incarceration in a
prison cell -- to say nothing of capital punishment -- only isolates the
criminal from the real world and makes him less of a human being.  That's
fine, if society's primary objective is to punish for the sake of revenge.

In recent decades addiction has been treated quite effectively in a
controlled setting where various life options are explored by a peer leader
who has learned to control his own habit.  Years ago I got interested in
John B. Watson's "Behaviorist" movement and his vision of a controlled
environment for the behavioral "conditioning" of children.  This never
really got off the ground, largely due to the public's objection to the use
of force as a corrective method.  However, Watson's methods were aimed at
instilling the value of self-discipline rather than resorting to brute
force, a skill that parents today seem to lack -- particular among the
underclass of our society which accounts for most of the crime.

Exposure to military discipline often works wonders on asocial teenagers and
young people for the same reasons.  Having been subjected to military
training myself during the Korean conflict, I was impressed by the efficacy
of enforced discipline and the esprit-de-corps it inspired, especially in
youths who under typical ghetto conditions would have been gangsters, pimps,
or drug dealers on their way to a life in prison.

My thought is that criminal behavior might be similarly "correctable" if
rehabilitation were to involve mandatory training in something like "value
options".  The problem, of course, is that values themselves are something
that can not and should never have to be "taught".  And anyone who sets
himself up as a "values specialist" for criminal rehabilitation will be
looked upon -- justifiably so -- as having his own political or social
agenda.  This was the Achilles Heel in Plato's ideal Republic, and it has
been contested in every autocrat, emperor, or dictator who has ever aspired
to create his own idealized version of "the Noble Society".  In some
respects this kind of hubris also applies to the leader of a powerful and
influential nation who seeks to liberate the world community according to
his notion of liberty.

But, philosophically speaking, even if achieving a balance of values in the
criminal mindset is potentially feasible, it could never work so long as
estheticians and behavioral scientists are in disagreement on what values
are and how they're derived.  Regrettably, I see the evolutionary concept of
value being advanced by the MoQ as an impediment to a workable solution.  If
we can't perceive value as the individual's connection to an essential
source, as opposed to an attribute of Nature or the objective world, we've
lost the battle before we start.

But, then, that's just my personal perspective.

Regards and Happy Father's Day,
Ham