The Panopticon and the all seeing eye

[Jimbozu]

The Panopticon is a prison designed by Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century in which cells are distributed in a circle around a central guard tower in such a way that the guard can potentially see any inmate, but the inmates are unable to see the guard. The idea of the design is that while there is in reality a very low possibility that any one inmate is being watched at any given time, the fear of surveillance prevents bad behavior.

I have to debate on this concept in a few days and I'd like to get a discussion going, because I don't really have anything to say... So... discuss?

[Sgnl>04]

Pretty cool concept. It's also an album by Isis, add that in the discusson.

[Maitereya]

are you debating for or against?

[Highbinder]

Sounds like the Cube triology of films is based off the idea, and 1984 seems to take from it too

IMO sounds pretty awsome..

/goes to wikipedia

[MoreBudzForMe]

Sounds like a metaphor for the great soul, universal soul, god, the egyptian Ba and Ka, and Jesus' Father which is in 'heaven'(mind/imagination).

[BKKG]

A good route to go in a Panopticon discussion is whether or not it is ethical. The constant supervision which can never be confirmed or avoided by the prisoner causes all kinds of pressures on their minds, and is it really worth whatever benefits to good behaviour the prison might get?

[Digit]

see those cameras on our streets, see those prisons that priests preach,

watch thyself, for thy disnae ken when the masculine dominator tyrant is watching...


it's such a much better situation when we all get to listen and to see. and we can. it's a lie that we ever couldnt. just because we weren't doesnt mean we cant, nor perhaps that we arent, and that we're just not yet aware of it. watch all and know all, that is.

this is a deap impacting issue that gets to the heart of one's philosophy and interpretations of the universe which colour their reality and shape their behaviour.

liberties, who gets to know what, freedom of information (in the real sense, not the newspeak bs), respecting rights of others....
...can i go to your class for you? i could talk the whole day on this. ... infact, i might just stay online and do that. lol.


ever the question "who watches the watchers?", that is, until a solution is hit upon. i hit upon make everyone the watcher (and watcher of watchers too, this is essential).

[BKKG]

I'll discuss with you, Digit!

[Digit]

well do it then. anouncing you'll do it is about as useful as ..... idk. something pretty useless. i should know. i'm always sayin i'll do shit.

Originally Posted by BKKG

A good route to go in a Panopticon discussion is whether or not it is ethical. The constant supervision which can never be confirmed or avoided by the prisoner causes all kinds of pressures on their minds, and is it really worth whatever benefits to good behaviour the prison might get?

yeah the behaviour thing....


what worth is there in good behaviour if it can only be found at the end of a barrel or batton?

nothing is learned in the person. only conditioned responses which are still focused on self interests.

its same why theres often alot of friction between me n supposed authoroties exerting actions upon people which brings about the opposite effects from the proclaimed desired result.


idiots. incompetent idiots.


i hope.


because if they are not incompetent, then they are negligent or doing it intentionally. neither is more appealing than the thought that they might just be incompetent. yet truth does not yield to appeal.

[BKKG]

It's true that behaviour which comes about as a result of conditioning (including fear of punishment) is tainted as far as pure ethics are concerned, but it does have a practical effect in maintaining societies. If nobody commits murder, then society is more stable and able to sustain itself, regardless of whether or not those non-murderers are acting out of moral concern or plain self interest. But when people confuse these these separate issues that serious problems arise.

But in terms of ethical behaviour, I agree with you that only the freedom to act allows for an ethical choice to be made.

[Digit]

yeah, hard as it may seem to be to achieve sometimes in some cases, there really is always at least several better options than the high-maintenance symptom-bandaid/plaster that is punishment based obedience.

these alternatives might be a gentle suggestion or nudge towards reccognising and realising internally the better paths, or it may involve just changing the chemical compositions available to the physical being, ie, drug based behaviour control. any of these may result in the motive/incentive to change.

who ever has the right to be in the tower though. and also, who came up with this sick idea in the first place n put people in the tower. i doubt the guys in the tower were the ones to come up with the idea.

these are all interesting areas to explore for jimbozu's class discussion.


.... and the gaurds in the tower...... they too are prisoners of a sort.

prisoners to their duty, to their obligations, to their uniform, to the expectations of them, to their responsibilities, to the situation where they need the money so they took the job but now are a little uneasy about it, or perhaps a little too easy about it and prisoner to the addictions of chemical stimulus from a sadistic bent. who knows. who picks the watchmen? who watches who picks the watchmen?




just remembered... fortress.
the movie.
and it's sequels.

go hire them out for some entertainment that will still keep you studying. kinda like a working holiday, its studying relaxation&recreation time.

[Tical00]

Reminds me of a arena.