This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
eradicate punishment from the law system. instead, teach.
we as a species should learn to teach right from wrong instead of simply casting away our own species into seclusion, and hoping the problem will go away.
popular law and politics dictates that we should make examples of people who commit a crime to show other people that an action shouldn't be done through means of fear.
in my opinion, fear does not work for the long-run, especially in modern times where upon the public doubts governmental law and even politicians/law-makers themselves.
i propose that methods should be developed that involve mandatory psychologists and sociologists to attend court cases with follow-ups on individuals who are jailed, periodically with the intention to develop reports on as many elements as possible that led up to the crime itself.
with privacy kept in mind, reports could then be made publicly available and delivered to current law-makers/politicians to change or remove elements of a recipe for popular crime.
in cases where societal elements themselves are part of the recipe for a crime, and can be changed or removed, politicians and law-makers have the power to do so via means of education.
to do so through schools is a start, but humans don't ever stop learning throughout their lives, so other ways of educating people who have committed a crime _and_ the public (potential crime-committers) should be made available to change or remove elements of society that lead to a crime and eventually remove the crime itself.
EDIT: as Christophe Cop first mentioned, removing some people from society is necessary. while these people can still learn, i still think that they don't need to be punished in order to do so. for further information to back up my belief please see this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Positive_and_negative_reinforcement
Closing Statement from griffin tucker
i closed this idea early, simply because the amount and quality of feedback has led me to want to re-write the idea.
while many people demand justice by way of punishment, i believe the idea of punishment is not the best way to solve a re-occurring problem, but instead increases the likelihood of it happening again.
positive reinforcement simply works better than punishment in any case, but due to the current model of western society, there are certain restraints that mean there are more immediate demands at hand that require attention. so, other methods including punishment are used instead of positive reinforcement.
i believe social policy needs to be changed as a result.
according to the model of 'systematic evidence-based preventative social policy' (i think it needs a new name) it is what is proven to be working better than existing methods by means of already existing objective evidence.
in other words, if it works, and it's proven, the idea will be started. but this is not democracy.
currently, law-makers work on the assumption that if they don't get enough votes at the next election, they will lose their power to make laws - and since the easiest way to keep their power is to do whatever the majority says, this is what they have a tendancy to do.
law-makers react to popular opinion, but is popular opinion necessarily more correct or incorrect than evidence-based social policy? i don't know, myself.
thank-you all for your contributions.
myra noll
Punishment is not equal to jail time, and jail is not meant to work as a punishment for the behavior of those locked in, but is a way in which we 'clean up' our society and maintain it`s defined structure running. I have never heard any judge saying 'I `m sentencing you to prison so that in the future you won`t [for example] kill again' but I head this instead "I `m sentencing you to prison so that the families would have some comfort [that their reality is known and working well, and the crime that happened is just an anomaly that we can isolate]'. I agree that jail is overused and is too expensive for what it`s effects are, but eradicating it altogether is not the answer; we do not have all the knowledge to change all behavior and in some cases people need to be locked in some 'safe places' because of our limited knowledge.
On short, eradicating punishment from the law system or any system is way to radical and not very wise. In some situations punishment might be the only technique that can change a behavior and if our goal was to change that behavior it would be rather foolish from our part not to use it. The main problem, as I see it, is that public policies are not based on evidence, and what should be eradicated is not punishment, but bad public policies making.
griffin tucker 10+
punishment will only prevent unwanted behaviour from happening if the punishment or threat of punishment is going to occur. if they think they can get away with it, quite often, they will try it. once they get away with it, they can then learn that they will only sometimes get the threat of punishment.
punishment also has other bad side-affects that positive reinforcement simply does not have - from the receiver - anger, resentment, irrational fear, etc. and from the giver - guilt, reinforcing anger, reinforcing resentment, etc.
when i said in previous post "what i disagree on is that negative reinforcement should be the way to teach," i meant "what i disagree on is that _punishment_ should be the way to teach."
i agree that punishment is not equal to jail time, but it is the threat of jail that stops an individual from commiting crimes that could lead an individual there. basically, an artificially created fear. at the moment, our society demands that we need to isolate individuals in order for our current society to function properly.
in the quote "I `m sentencing you to prison so that the families would have some comfort [that their reality is known and working well, and the crime that happened is just an anomaly that we can isolate]' - this is simply reinforcing punishment as an accepted behaviour from the view of the families.
as i've mentioned before, removing individuals from society is necessary, but in my opinion, jail shouldn't be feared.
the reason why i chose the word eradicate for removing punishment from the law system is to imply that it would happen over a long period of time, gradually enough so that it wouldn't bring too much shock to the current system as we know it.
it's simply my belief that positive reinforcement can work in any situation instead of where punishment _seems_ to work - if applied correctly.
Lucy Armitage
You would have to educate non-offenders as well as offenders in order for peace, understanding and acceptance.
griffin tucker 10+
i believe the way to do this is to remove the idea of punishment from society.
in a lot of my posts i have mentioned 'negative reinforcement' where i meant to say 'punishment.'
there are actually 4 methods of reinforcement as mentioned here:
http://allpsych.com/psychology101/reinforcement.html
Colleen Steen 500+
Anca Tiurean 10+
Denomyar 01
griffin tucker 10+
in the u.s. there is www.coalition4evidence.org that claims to be unaffiliated with any political party.
in australia there is a relatively lengthy 2009 article on an australian government website www.apsc.gov.au/publications09/evidencebasedpolicy.htm that describes the 'challenge' of evidence-based policy.
Anca Tiurean 10+
Colleen Steen 500+
Rarely are they administered by the state or federal government any more. Who is going to be at a loss if offenders are rehabilitated? The profitable business.
griffin tucker 10+
Colleen Steen 500+
griffin tucker 10+
perhaps if the business was given more money incentives from the government depending on how successful it is, as compared to schools?
Colleen Steen 500+
We're running out of time Griffin. We need to solve this in 28 minutes!!!
griffin tucker 10+
Stern Rockwell
Colleen Steen 500+
Education may be a punishment for some of "these cats" in the beginning...and then...they may actually learn something and move beyond the behaviors that are not beneficial to themselves or society.
Denomyar 01
Colleen Steen 500+
The present systems are not cheap....$60,000 - $75,000 per inmate per year is not "cheap" in my perception.
I would like to see correctional facilities become self sustaining "villages", where offenders could learn skills s/he could use when they go back into communities.
Comment deleted
TAB Baldwin
All the money, attention, teahing, care and sympathy in the world will not assist someone who does not make a conscious choice to be helped. I believe that honest labor is the greatest cure and when this isn't chosen, the alternative must be so repugnant that work (and all its benefits) become a desired course of action FOR THE PRISONER.
Freedom to choose is the last dignity we strip from a prisoner and I believe this is wrong and unintelligent. However, the choices must refllect the situation in which the criminal has put himself. Crime not only deserves punishment but, further, it demands it.
Colleen Steen 500+
Probably some of the programs you mention were stopped because they were successful?
TAB,
It seems like offenders could be given choices regarding what "work" they could choose while serving time. In this area, working in the gardens at the facility, for example is voluntary for the offenders. The gardens are a very successful project which has been going on for several years. They supply all their own vegetables, as well as contribute food to other non-profit organizations. When I facilitated "cognitive self change" sessions,3 of the men came into the sessions directly from the gardens, and they were in a totally different mind set. They had been out in the sun and fresh air, working in the soil, and producing something that was/is very valuable, and they were more open minded to new ideas regarding their behaviors.
Arriba Stature
Let's be honest, not all of us, but enough, are a bloodthirsty crew.
Not only that, we have a whole sub-culture of kids wearing clothes that are basically prison garb. Music inspired by prison life. Prison life glamorized in fashion and music.
Other countries, handle this question with a lot more humanity. Let's look and see how they do it. From what I've read their whole take on the human condition is more of the attitude "We're all in this together". That extends to how they care for their sick and aged. Something we haven't worked out yet. We are still stuck in our tribal mentality as a country, defined as "It's us against them".
Let's not forget that the prison system for all it flaws employs a lot of people. If anything needs to change about the prison system it's how those people art trained and treated. When people are exposed to brutality for long periods of time, they themselves become unaffected by it, thus becoming part of the problem instead of a potential solution. That's where I'd start to work towards change, all the other points I've made are too big to tackle for the time being.
Thanks for reading this.
Colleen Steen 500+
I learned a lot while volunteering with the dept. of corrections for 6 years, facilitating various sessions, including "cognitive self change", serving on the reparative board, working with probation and parole and offenders. Our correctional systems are not working. We 're spending money building larger facilities, and I believe we should be using the money and other resourses to teach different behaviors. I totally agree with you Griffin...fear is not a good teacher. The only thing it teaches successfully, is not to get caught. Offenders need to understand themselves...understand the programming that causes them to offend. Approx. 95% of those incarcerated are drug and/or alchohol addicted. A majority of them have been physically/sexually abused as children. There are a lot of wounded people who commit crimes against society, and we, as a society continue to wound them. That doesn't make any sense.
There are a couple programs, which continue to be successful in dealing with offenders, and integrating them back into society with some new tools, which assist them in becoming more productive members of the community.
"Real Justice" is a program that needs facilitation, and has been used in correctional facilities, pre and post court, throughout the USA.
(It was started by some motivated, insightful folks in Australia Griffin!!!)
Another beneficial book and workshop program is: "Houses of Healing" - A Prisoner's Guide to Inner Power and Freedom - Robin Casarjian.
The book stands well alone, as a guide for prisoners, administration, families, etc. and there is a workbook that can be used to facilitate workshop sessions with offenders. Both of these books/workbooks are available on line.
Offenders are generally insecure and lack self confidence. They need to learn skills that will serve them when they are released. If they do not learn new behaviors, the old behaviors dominate, and they land right back in jail.
griffin tucker 10+
thanks for referring me to "Real Justice," it holds my interest at the moment, and also the international institute for restorative practices:
http://www.iirp.edu/
i will do some research on IIRP.
griffin tucker 10+
there was a re-birth of the popularity of the movement for evidence-based, preventive social policy in 2009 in australia (and world-wide?) but not much in the way of information regarding the topic since then has occurred, although...
systematic review models are around such as www.campbellcollaboration.org .
currently the campbell collaboration is looking for people to do an investigation into the effectiveness of sentencing and corrections.
Anca Tiurean 10+
griffin tucker 10+
i don't disagree that negative reinforcement teaches people. what i disagree on is that negative reinforcement should be the way to teach. although it may be harder to teach someone that putting a hand in a fire will burn the hand, in a positive way instead of negative, i still believe it is a better way.
as i've said before - i agree that some people need to be removed from society in order to learn. the idea hasn't been completely shaped yet, and since the original idea has been proposed, parts of the idea, including not 'simply casting away our own species into seclusion' has been modified.
myra noll
The best way to teach implies the best choices between positive and negative reinforcement, and positive and negative punishment. These choices depend on many factors - like the topography of the behavior, the urgency of the behavior change, the resources available and so on.
Prison was never meant to be a place where society puts its outcasts in order for them to learn its rules. Prison is just a place where society puts those that do not follow its rules so that it can maintain its structure. It is a very easy solution on the short term but ends up very costly and ineffective on the long run, and I think here lays the problem: we don`t need to lock people up if we have the knowledge we need in order to change their behaviors, but we need a place where we can control those that are a threat to us and for which no known behavior modification technique works.
Alystar Mckenneh
There is no such population. You can not point to one group of humans who do not commit severe crimes that could have been stopped by education because I don't know one group or population that teaches their children to rape and murder. So if it's not taught where does it come from? Human beings are very complex and therapy is ...not.
By the way, how many of your relatives have been rape? Or murdered?
Frans Kellner 100+
Here I can put an elaborate list of what this can be and every individual case will be differ from another by the combination of causes.
A list like that would show that many things we cannot change overnight but just being aware makes it possible to change our society and our thinking bit by bit in the right direction.
New generations would be more healthy and less criminal.
Just punishing is what we call pouring more oil on the fire. We need to get smarter.
Nikko Scelzo
TAB Baldwin
Crime should be punished. Once criminals have shown that they have a true desire to contribute to rather than detract from society then they should wholeheartedly be welcomed back into society albeit on a trial basis.
Therefore, I suggest a Justice System that, instead of being a financial burden on society and keeping our criminals in a holding pen until their release date or until the overcrowding forces a 'rethink' of the severity of their crime, assists criminals to truly PAY for their crime. The prison system should be an asset to government and not a cost.
When a criminal commits a crime, he makes his last free choice since a crime results in the loss of rights one of which is freedom. I maintain that a he should have one final choice: Do I wish to pay for my crime or suffer serious punishment? If he chooses to pay for the crime then he should be put to work for the government that has a multitude of taxpayer funded jobs (street cleaning, road building, etc) that could easily be done by unskilled labor. If the criminal chooses NOT to pay for his crime then society should choose to afford the criminal subsistence living: basically bread/vegetables and water and a spartan cage. Period. I do not suggest affecting health, only comfort.
However, for our working criminals, a good 10 hour workday (with subsistence pay for their someday release), exhaustive work (so as to lessen prison violence) and dignity through productive contribution to society.
Positive results for society & the criminal. People change when habits change.
Cameron Garcia
However, I do agree with you that the prison system shouldn't be something that completely hinders us.
TAB Baldwin
Also, I am assuming that this system is a deterrent to crime in the long run so the job market would not be adversely affected except for the fact that we would have fewer citizens in jail and more in society...hopefully being productive rather than non-productive. Isn't this what we are all hoping for in this discussion?
Alystar Mckenneh
TAB Baldwin
Unfortunately, we will always have crime and criminals but we don't always have to pay for them.
Further to my post earler, I don't see prisoners deemed mentally incapacitated as serving hard time or working (other than those jobs that may ( I emphasize "may" suit them) nor do I see the aged or infirm. They could assume the less arduous duties around the prison complex (laundry, yard maintenance, light gardening, etc.) currently done by too many healthy bodies.
Nikko Scelzo
griffin tucker 10+
Nikko Scelzo
Joe Fletcher
Incentivise sustainability,
Start THE FINAL WAR ON POVERTY
Heal the sick.
Prisons will become obsolete software.
Random Chance 30+
People on the outside need the education as well, if not more. They think, "I'm well-adjusted and criminals are not." Someone said, "It is not a measure of mental health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." Those well-adjusted are the sickest. It is their very society that has bred crime, and condones it in those who also sound, look and seemingly behave sanely. But, we know too much now. Too many have been caught, found out and they are our most prominent looking members of our crime-family. Start at the top.
Austin R 20+
Punishment for the sake of deterrence and disincentive is necessary.
The Legal System should be focused around teaching, of course, but it must also deter crime.
griffin tucker 10+
if there was a way to deter bad things from happening without negative reinforcement, then that is the general premise of this idea.
Austin R 20+
Austin R 20+
griffin tucker 10+
two subjects of interest for me at the moment in the psychology field are carl jung's theory of the collective unconscious and negative reinforcement.
although the collective unconscious is sometimes considered to be 'out there' - even in terms of psychology - it still holds a very deep interest for me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious
Lynn Lee
Crimes are committed under different circumstances, some could be a moment of impulse, folly, foolishness, peer pressure, desperation, etc...It might be useful to understand the motivation behind the crime before deciding whether to mete out any punishment and what to mete out. Some commit crimes because they are ignorant and do not know the consequences. In these cases, teaching them might make them change. At the end of the day, no matter how good one can teach these people , it is up to the individual to be receptive and willing to mend his ways. People learn mistakes in different ways. Some learn through the hard way, like being sent to bars and "forced" to reflect over the deeds committed. Some, especially for those who commit crimes in a moment of folly, impulse might be able to mend their ways through guidance and teaching. There are so many factors that affect the individual's ability and willingness to change for the better like...the family environment and support, their own resolution, etc...To solve the problem, it might be worthwhile finding out the root cause and motivation behind the crimes before deciding whats the best solution for the individual...
griffin tucker 10+
"If one commits a murder crime, as compared to another individual stealing food from a store, is it to say both individuals can get away from punishment despite difference in severity of crime?"
interesting question. for the sake of argument, i will say yes, but it means each individual would be treated differently in the method of learning they would undertake, or help they would receive. as Christophe Cop mentioned in a post under this topic, perhaps the people do indeed need to be helped in an enclosed environment - but i suppose this defeats the purpose of the idea.
in a documentary called "Louis Theroux: Behind Bars" it shows that close to a third of the inmates actually prefer to be in the correctional facilities than in what i will refer to as relative 'popular society.' in fact a lot of these individuals will commit a crime again once they're out, just so they can go back to what's familiar.
i think this is actually something wrong with current society/law itself, and with this idea is how i intend to try to improve the problem.
"Would this law practice encourage more potential crime committers?"
yes, if the general populous of society hasn't learnt why crimes shouldn't be committed, or hasn't learnt how to deal with their crime 'habit' - using the term habit loosely. it would be important to introduce this idea over a large amount of time, to slowly remove the idea of punishment from society until it is 'eradicated' in a sense.
"Some learn through the hard way, like being sent to bars and "forced" to reflect over the deeds committed."
yes, and i honestly don't believe this method works for everyone, although it may for some - but even for those that it _seems_ to work for, positive reinforcement will always work better without many (or any) of the consequences of negative reinforcement.
i agree with your last sentence whole-heartedly.
terry wilkinson
griffin tucker 10+
what i disagree with, is the negative reinforcement imposed upon the court system inciting fear upon the public.
with this idea is how i propose to change that.
the idea isn't perfect, but i think it's a start.
griffin tucker 10+
Borrah Campbell
Something like that is beyond redemption & should be removed from society by as many degrees as possible!
Colleen Steen 500+
The reason I would like to teach offenders something different, is so that I and other members of society do not have to live in fear when they are released. There is no mechanism to keep the majority of offenders in jail forever, unless it is a most severe crime. Most of them ARE going to come into society again. Would you prefer them to come back as they were before, without education? Or would you prefer them to come into society with education and possibly some different life skills?
Salim Solaiman 50+
It itself is prisoner of " Money &/ Power".
griffin tucker 10+
Salim Solaiman 50+
That's a good starting point to start with really as now poor & or powerless only getting that.
Kathleen (Kathy) Larson 100+
tishe Hires 10+
Christophe Cop 500+
you don't need to see that as a punishment. Those people can learn to adapt to society while staying isolated.
Maybe you can also look into the psychology of negative reinforcements and the effects of punishment as a form of conditioning and learning behavior.
Your general point is way too naive and does not relate to reality.
griffin tucker 10+
in the u.s., jails are referred to as 'correctional facilities' yet in courts up until this day people are made examples of in order to bring fear (or negative reinforcement) upon the public so that they will not commit the same crime.
i agree that the idea needs to be shaped some more.
griffin tucker 10+
the subject is relevant, as it describes the argument 'morality is better informed by science than it is by religion.'
Phillip McKay
Benny boy
The justice system has to have people take its word on that ('that' being - using killing as a means of punishment) for it to exist as a place of power.
because justice is humanitys way of expressing adaptability or making people change their behavior for the benefit of all.
so this is why i agree that teaching people instead of punishing them is a good way to adapt behavior, giving people the chance and opportunity to evolve and live their life instead of being 'proven guilty and punished for it'.
they could be 'proven responsible and taught directly, with them having a choice to be killed in a humane way if they didn't wish to continue.'
griffin tucker 10+
we, as a society, could learn from the individual on trial themselves and learn as to why the crime occurred and attempt to prevent the same crime from occurring again.
tishe Hires 10+
You are tough! So many big words. So many big thoughts.
Mr. Tucker, good luck to you! ( I mean it, with all my heart) Oh, p.s.,,, what does "allocations" mean??
With Respect to Ya!! :) !!!
griffin tucker 10+
for example - instead of spending money on jails, spend it on this idea, since there would be less people in jail, the jails wouldn't need as much money.
unfortunately this raises other problems such as the literal business sense of jails - just as "Random Chance" said in another post in this thread, jails are now traded on the stock market - which means their investors will be concerned, so, the jails/jail companies will have to be developed to better suit the idea (which i still believe is possible with a trial.)
tishe Hires 10+
I am just saying?
Wonderful ideas cost money.
I actually, am on the side of your idea! (just playin' devil's advocate) With Respect to ya!!
griffin tucker 10+
i suppose if i were to try to put the idea into action, to fund it, i would re-arrange current allocations of money that would no longer require funding due to the course of the idea's premise _after_ a successful trial has been thouroughly tested.
to fund the trial would most likely require volunteer payments, until a time that it becomes more feasible, and then tax-payer money could pay for extended trials and eventual implementation - that is, if the trials are successful.
Nicholas Malin
griffin tucker 10+
tishe Hires 10+
THE funding? The money?
(aww man, i forgot, we not care about funding and debt.)
I love your ideas!
It is not realistic.
Mr. Tucker, do you really think, a human, can pull this idea off?
Humans are idiots, get over it and get used to it.
With Respect To Ya!
griffin tucker 10+
you're right, perhaps i am a little too idealistic, but that's the way i am.
inthegarden beyondthecave
griffin tucker 10+
on a lighter note - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB7jSFeVz1U
Random Chance 30+
Environment plays the biggest role in this along with money. In the environments we have created, too many people are not getting their needs met but they still have to survive. Nothing wrong there. Not even in the way they go about it. The reason only one or two get out of poverty at a time, is because there is only room for one or two at a time.
Studies have shown that close to 100% of all crime in the world is directly connected to money. This is the biggest culprit and cause of crime, from those trapped in poverty and those who seem, look and claim to be of the moral high ground. The wealthy, the powerful, etc. Why in hell do you think they choose that? They have the laws on their side and they control everything around those laws. That is what people need to get real about.
Crime also comes from poverty or more accurately the need to survive against a system that makes one a crimimal for trying to do so. It is the system that is wrong not the people.
As far as money goes, "things don't get done because of money. Things don't get done, because of money!"
It is people who get things done, not politicians, bankers, or government. They feed off of the people and create problems for profit. Change that and people behave
griffin tucker 10+
yes, laws come from crime, that's why they're there.
i simply disagree that laws, lawmakers, politicians, or courts don't solve problems. were they not there, i believe problems would be ten-fold. if they are irrelevant to some of our lives, it would most likely be because they're working.
it's very easy to blame money itself as being evil or wrong, but money itself is just a tool.
studies may well have indeed shown that close to 100% of all crime is indirectly connected to money, i don't dispute that, but i dispute that it was the cause of all these crimes. to me it sounds like a warped statistic.
as for living in a country that is better off than another - this is relative.
were all people in the world to share every bit of wealth equally, we would all be living on less than $500 (US) per year worth of wealth (as of 2010). this doesn't equate to much. in fact, i don't think there would be any room for any innovation or technology advancements because we'd _all_ be fighting over money, instead of just the poor who are at the moment.
now, if you still feel as though you have to do some something about living in a country that is better off than another, or feel guilty about it, i suggest you move to that other country.
as for the zeitgest ideal, i still haven't read anything close to a transition that sounds feasible.
Random Chance 30+
As you stated laws are made because of crime but they don't solve the problem and more than ever before in human history, we all need these programs solved, not bandaged, cosmetically covered or fixed because the system cannot be fixed. Something new has to replace it and you will be part of it or not, depending upon the degree you can separate yourself from your ego, your artificial intelligence and your robotic mentality. And I don't mean just you. We are all being made artificially intelligent. Our problems already are "ten-fold" and it isn't because of me or crime. It is because our politicians, leaders, corporations and religions have failed us because THAT IS WHAT IS IN PLACE AND HAS BEEN FOR TOO LONG!
It is because of money which you so cavalierly dismiss as a tool, and you miss that it is the tool that has been used to create the mess we are in.
griffin tucker 10+
what i mean is to say there has been little progress by way of a 'transition phase' other than to mention dooms-day type of scenarios. if you have any new literature on _how_ the transition phase will occur for the zeitgeist movement, or any at all, please refer me to it - i would honestly be interested in reading it.
i disagree that the current system can't be bandaged or patched as we progress. i believe _any_ system that we live in would have to be patched as we progress. whether or not the system is replaced by the zeitgeist ideal will still result in the system having flaws. no system is perfect.
it's good that the zeitgeist movement brings some important points to the table, but if i were to take a scientist's view-point and question the ideal, then i would find that not all aspects of the ideal are feasible to obtain _with_ a transition. it's like going from (a) to (c), and skipping (b).
Random Chance 30+
Joe Fletcher
We are just following a course that has already been laid before us, different levels of complexity, same rules, recognizing the patterns and adjusting accordingly is how we will get of our pretty lil rock called Earth.
griffin tucker 10+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Venus_Project
the wikipedia article is highly debated, as well as any google search, so it's hard to find any unbiased source of information about the venus project.
much like any religious debate between an atheist and a theist, the standpoint from both sides is to think along the lines of trying to get the other to see from their own point of view. in other words, this debate could go on forever, as it's a clash of beliefs, not a constructional debate.
terry wilkinson