Final answer:
The Pennsylvania system focused on solitary confinement for moral reform, while the Auburn system allowed group labor under silence, both reflecting early 19th-century prison philosophies.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Pennsylvania system was developed in the early 19th century and is known for its practice of placing inmates in solitary confinement to encourage reflection and penitence, with the hope of moral rehabilitation. In contrast, the Auburn system, which arose shortly thereafter in New York, enforced strict silence but allowed inmates to work together in groups during the day, which was believed to be beneficial for discipline and efficiency. Both systems reflect historical approaches to prison management and the ongoing debate over the goals of incarceration: punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The solitary confinement approach of Pennsylvania's system has been criticized for causing psychological damage, while the labor-focused Auburn system has faced scrutiny over its resemblance to slave labor and potential profit-driven motives, especially as modern private prisons come under similar criticisms.
These historical systems provide context for current discussions on human rights and rehabilitation in the correctional system, as well as the continued controversy surrounding the use of solitary confinement and the privatization of prisons. Moreover, such debates are underscored by experiments, like the Stanford prison experiment, demonstrating the psychological impact of prison conditions on individuals.