I tell myself, virtually every time now when I read your Substack posts, "No need to comment this time, Dirk, just read, enjoy, and then let it go. Chuck doesn't need you chiming in every single time." Maybe next time I'll follow my admonition, but today I just can't help but note how interesting I found the following observation / question: "We do regularly talk about climate’s affect on various populations, especially those who might migrate. What about people who are confined? Is the connection not made because they live, in many ways, outside of nature?" I find the idea that prisoners live "outside of nature" simply fascinating. It's common to suggest that what makes incarceration so punishing is that the incarcerated have been removed from society, and that, as such, they are forbidden to participate in their culture. Having violated cultural norms as defined by the law, for a period of time, they are denied most of the benefits of that culture. But, as you suggest, the punishment of imprisonment is made even harsher because prisoners are also forced to live "outside of nature." Alienation taken to the extreme. No wonder such folks have such a hard time adjusting to post-prison life: they have to reintegrate themselves not only in human society but they have to reintroduce themselves to the natural world, too.
I think what you say is exactly what I'm trying to wrap my head around--what is the "correction" in correctional. I have no impact on the justice system at all, and I'm glad for that. If sentences are deserved then that's what they are--people who teach there are totally separate from that, but when you look at the larger environment (for example, a significant employee/guard shortage has hampered the facilities quite a bit), what counts for rehabilitation versus punishment? Are are these things, which feel opposite, applied simultaneously?
I tell myself, virtually every time now when I read your Substack posts, "No need to comment this time, Dirk, just read, enjoy, and then let it go. Chuck doesn't need you chiming in every single time." Maybe next time I'll follow my admonition, but today I just can't help but note how interesting I found the following observation / question: "We do regularly talk about climate’s affect on various populations, especially those who might migrate. What about people who are confined? Is the connection not made because they live, in many ways, outside of nature?" I find the idea that prisoners live "outside of nature" simply fascinating. It's common to suggest that what makes incarceration so punishing is that the incarcerated have been removed from society, and that, as such, they are forbidden to participate in their culture. Having violated cultural norms as defined by the law, for a period of time, they are denied most of the benefits of that culture. But, as you suggest, the punishment of imprisonment is made even harsher because prisoners are also forced to live "outside of nature." Alienation taken to the extreme. No wonder such folks have such a hard time adjusting to post-prison life: they have to reintegrate themselves not only in human society but they have to reintroduce themselves to the natural world, too.
I think what you say is exactly what I'm trying to wrap my head around--what is the "correction" in correctional. I have no impact on the justice system at all, and I'm glad for that. If sentences are deserved then that's what they are--people who teach there are totally separate from that, but when you look at the larger environment (for example, a significant employee/guard shortage has hampered the facilities quite a bit), what counts for rehabilitation versus punishment? Are are these things, which feel opposite, applied simultaneously?