Sociopath Community

Dragoonback said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

I wrote about the process of aversion shock therapy and that it isn't a pleasant experience.

That's not all you wrote. You didn't just describe the procedure or say that it's unpleasant. You made direct and indirect claims about what it would do to the brain, compared it to other forms of psychological conditioning, said it could be good for criminals, and framed punishment as something that can correct supposedly terrible behavior.

Boo hoo.

Those are claims about its effects and usefulness, not mere descriptions of the process. Saying you only “wrote about the process” now is just narrowing what you originally said instead of addressing those claims.

 This type of therapy is probably good for criminals as it is a form of punishment and can potentially deter them from doing terrible things. If not at least something was done. 

You literally made a claim about its usefulness here: “This type of therapy is probably good for criminals as it is a form of punishment and can potentially deter them from doing terrible things.” That's not merely describing the process or saying that it's unpleasant. You're asserting that electrically shocking people is probably a useful form of punishment and deterrence. That claim needs evidence, and “if not at least something was done” isn't evidence. It just expresses approval of inflicting punishment regardless of whether it actually works.

Dragoonback said: 

You literally made a claim about its usefulness here: “This type of therapy is probably good for criminals as it is a form of punishment and can potentially deter them from doing terrible things.” That's not merely describing the process or saying that it's unpleasant. You're asserting that electrically shocking people is probably a useful form of punishment and deterrence.

I added a final note. It's okay to do that. 

That claim needs evidence, and “if not at least something was done” isn't evidence. It just expresses approval of inflicting punishment regardless of whether it actually works.

 It's called consequence. Consequence deters us from doing dumb shit.

Well. It does for most of us anyway. Some people never learn no matter how many times they stumble themselves into multiple calamites. lol you want proof. 

Spatial Mind said: 

I added a final note. It's okay to do that. 

 It's called consequence. Consequence deters us from doing dumb shit.

Well. It does for most of us anyway. Some people never learn no matter how many times they stumble themselves into multiple calamites. lol you want proof. 

Yes, consequences can influence behavior. That doesn't prove that electrically shocking people is an effective or appropriate consequence. You're jumping from the general fact that consequences can deter some behavior to the specific conclusion that deliberately inflicting pain is a good behavioral intervention. That's the part you still haven't supported.

And “you want proof” misses the point. You made the claim that this type of therapy is “probably good for criminals.” The burden is on you to support that specific claim, not on me to prove that it doesn't work.

Dragoonback said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

I added a final note. It's okay to do that. 

 It's called consequence. Consequence deters us from doing dumb shit.

Well. It does for most of us anyway. Some people never learn no matter how many times they stumble themselves into multiple calamites. lol you want proof. 

Yes, consequences can influence behavior. That doesn't prove that electrically shocking people is an effective or appropriate consequence.

Consequence doesn't need one's approval. 

Don't recall claiming this method to being appropriate either.

You're jumping from the general fact that consequences can deter some behavior to the specific conclusion that deliberately inflicting pain is a good behavioral intervention. That's the part you still haven't supported.

Partially correct. I did not support this. 

And “you want proof” misses the point. You made the claim that this type of therapy is “probably good for criminals.” The burden is on you to support that specific claim, not on me to prove that it doesn't work.

 "Probably good for criminals" isn't the same as "Good for criminals"

.

.

.

I can't always help you figure things out Goon. I'm not all that motivated, I should at least be paid for my time helping you understand and cope and learn and all that comes with it. 

Spatial Mind said:

Don't recall claiming this method to being appropriate either. Partially correct. I did not support this. "Probably good for criminals" isn't the same as "Good for criminals" I can't always help you figure things out Goon. I'm not all that motivated, I should at least be paid for my time helping you understand and cope and learn and all that comes with it.

“Probably good for criminals” is still a claim that the method is potentially beneficial for criminals. The word “probably” expresses uncertainty, not neutrality. And saying you “did not support this” doesn't really fit with saying it is probably good because it can deter people.

“Consequence doesn't need one's approval” is also irrelevant to my point. I wasn't arguing that consequences require permission to exist. I was questioning whether deliberately shocking people is an effective or appropriate consequence in the first place. You still haven't established that.

And the “I should be paid for my time helping you understand” comment is unnecessary. It just turns disagreement into a hierarchy where you're the one who understands and I'm the person who needs to be taught. That doesn't answer the argument.

Dragoonback said: 

Spatial Mind said:

Don't recall claiming this method to being appropriate either. Partially correct. I did not support this. "Probably good for criminals" isn't the same as "Good for criminals" I can't always help you figure things out Goon. I'm not all that motivated, I should at least be paid for my time helping you understand and cope and learn and all that comes with it.

“Probably good for criminals” is still a claim that the method is potentially beneficial for criminals. The word “probably” expresses uncertainty, not neutrality. And saying you “did not support this” doesn't really fit with saying it is probably good because it can deter people.

“Consequence doesn't need one's approval” is also irrelevant to my point. I wasn't arguing that consequences require permission to exist. I was questioning whether deliberately shocking people is an effective or appropriate consequence in the first place. You still haven't established that.

And the “I should be paid for my time helping you understand” comment is unnecessary. It just turns disagreement into a hierarchy where you're the one who understands and I'm the person who needs to be taught. That doesn't answer the argument.

 Sure.

It is a form of punishment. A horrible experience. 

Criminals are to be punished. 

Take away punishment and criminal activity spikes. 

Spatial Mind said: 

I don't think they do shock aversion therapy anymore. It says here the only place in the US that will perform this is in Massachusetts. 

This is behavioral therapy, and I think you need something to fix your poor behavior. Do I think it has anything to do with you being a homosexual ? No. You're clearly having  episodes of foolery, so I will not believe this has anything to do with you being a faggot. 

Strap in. put a stick in her mouth, and amp it up to max voltage. Go long and hard each session. Make sure the deed is done this time.

 

 

That's not even true the place they want me to go isn't even in Massachusetts are you on crack?

Also don't call me a faggot. 

It's some place my uncle is trying to convince my dad to send me that says they use that as a method there

Delora said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

I don't think they do shock aversion therapy anymore. It says here the only place in the US that will perform this is in Massachusetts. 

This is behavioral therapy, and I think you need something to fix your poor behavior. Do I think it has anything to do with you being a homosexual ? No. You're clearly having  episodes of foolery, so I will not believe this has anything to do with you being a faggot. 

Strap in. put a stick in her mouth, and amp it up to max voltage. Go long and hard each session. Make sure the deed is done this time.

 

 

That's not even true the place they want me to go isn't even in Massachusetts are you on crack?

 

Also don't call me a faggot. 

 

It's some place my uncle is trying to convince my dad to send me that says they use that as a method there

 The only place in the world that has shock aversion therapy is in Massachusetts.

This therapy is cruel and not acceptable overall. Controversial even. It's also been historically ineffective in turning gay people straight, this is something no facility would even attempt in 2026. If you do get therapy, it's for something else. If your parents want you to go in for that, they're not getting it. 

Spatial Mind said: 

 Sure. It is a form of punishment. A horrible experience. Criminals are to be punished. 

Take away punishment and criminal activity spikes. 

That's still a non sequitur. “Criminals should be punished” does not establish that electrically shocking people is an effective or appropriate form of punishment. You still have to establish that this specific intervention actually deters crime and that its harms are justified.

You're also treating punishment as though it were a neutral system that simply identifies bad people and gives them deserved consequences. Reality is much less clean than that. Laws and punishment are enforced by institutions, and those systems can be unequal, selective, and influenced by wealth, status, and access to legal resources. Someone being punished therefore isn't automatically evidence that they deserved the punishment or that the punishment produced some useful social outcome.

So you're building a black-and-white moral model where “criminal = bad = punishment = deterrence = good.” That's not an analysis of how punishment actually works. It's a moral narrative that assumes the conclusion.