!meta http-equiv="refresh" content="500">
Latin quote: Sic vive cum hominibus tanquam deus videat, et videt (Seneca)
"So live with men as if god saw you - and he does see you!!!!!"
A clockwork orange (1971) - based on the novel
There are two main schools of thought in what is prevailing wisdom within the circles of the Psychiatric profession. The "cognitive humanistic approach" believes in the use of rational methods to bring about an engagement in the mind so as to see a better perspective prevail in the minds of those involved. It requires of course correct engagement on those aspects of reason and emotion so as to bring true wisdom to bear. Cognitive engagement with issues of punishments and rewards that flow normally in what choices are made in human affairs would be "par for the course" as it were, and required too certainly. That goes without saying I suppose. In this model, punishments would have to be seen as only sane, however - in what a reasonable such person would fathom as such and completely so I suggest. On the other hand, behaviorism is a belief in the use of only punishments mainly that reason is engaged - and the absence of punishment is considered a reward obviously - in addition to other incentive use of tokens perhaps, as a belief in control through such a regime is all that is the basis for the employment of such tactics. The difference between this approach and the (previously mentioned) modern school of "cognitive humanistic therapies" is mainly in regards to the view as to whether man is a rational being a being with a conscience potentially engaged therefore, or simply more animalistic sort of a being which is therefore controlled by external restraints mainly - and based invariably on what are "survival instincts" alone. In the case of the latter, some advocate that only the most severe forms of punishments can be used for human management as it were as they regard men as actually devoid of conscience in the absence of oppressive controls. Many practice behaviorism strategies without regard to rational engagement in a bid to make man simply responsive to control and without regard to having valid ends for this idea of control - including as to whether a still sane man is to be the end result of surviving such treatment. As a result, this approach has long been discredited by modern schools of alternative thought in the mental health profession and Western society in general. In this movie, we get a look at "aversion therapy", aimed to reduce the pleasure from sadistic acts that a freak mind might otherwise engage in. We see depicted, what is brutal Rape and other sadistic acts such as senseless murder in what is a display of freak like enjoyment of such crimes. "Perhaps this therapy could work" we are told only I think in abstract theoretical terms to generate discussion. In actual fact, it is my own view that "capital punishment" (the death penalty) is the only alternative that is truly sane and practical as no being that abstains from sadistic criminality based only on fear of punishment is a being that is worth sustaining in our midst. To want to commit the crime is evil enough and that threat is more than those innocent members of society should have to endure. You cannot control through artificial means as a freak outcome is all you will persist in sustaining at a cost to our sanity which is too high to bear. Michael Rizzo Chessman (moviesbyrizzo)
Sic cogitandum est tanquam aliquis in
pectus intimum inspicere posit (Seneca)
"A man should so think that anyone might be able to look into his innermost heart"