Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register |
PSU Social
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
PSU: Hey, Vanu don't shoot like girls! Girls are way better.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register |
PSU Social
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
View Poll Results: What do you identify yourself as? | |||
Atheist/Skeptic/Agnostic |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
151 | 70.89% |
Catholic |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
21 | 9.86% |
Protestant |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
24 | 11.27% |
Jewish |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
5 | 2.35% |
Muslim |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
2 | 0.94% |
Philisophy (Such as Buddhism) |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
10 | 4.69% |
Voters: 213. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #676 | ||
So you think people who are schizophrenic and commit a murder or something should be charged the same as if you or I committed a murder?
Just for reference. People who have things wrong with their brains are at the mercy of their pathology. Acting as if someone with brain damage is just as responsible for their actions as you or I is profoundly ignorant of just what it means to be living with brain damage for some people. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #679 | |||
Lieutenant General
|
Furthermore, if it's un- or poorly treatable, they should be institutionalised by definition, since they'd be a danger to themselves and others. It does NOT mean I'd be more emphatic for them. And while being treated, they should be in a locked-in environment. Too often people get out of these institutes and murder or rape someone because of low security, getting out under supervision and escaping, etc. Just because the solution and punishment/treatment differs doesn't mean I feel more sympathy for them. What is fair and reasonable/optimal way of dealing with the situation doesn't have to have anything to do with sympathy. Last edited by Figment; 2012-06-06 at 05:24 PM. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #680 | |||
Lieutenant General
|
I'm saying both he and Duke are well aware of the choice they make, they just don't want to see the rationale behind those choices aren't exactly... "well done". They're both caught in irrational logic, fear and anger. I can't muster sympathy for either of these trains of thought, which they are fully in control of, but too biased and self-important to actually apply correctly, objectively and fairly. So no Elcyco, not every comparison with WWII is a Godwin. That's you being biased and making yourself off easy with not having to deal with the rationale behind the argument. Why do you think I chose that? Because I knew you would go for the godwinning default defense (seen you do it before). That's a choice to ignore input, it's not because you've been wired wrong. Last edited by Figment; 2012-06-06 at 05:50 PM. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #681 | ||
Lieutenant General
|
Every point yes.
One in 500 posts though? No. Then it's just you who blocks the information by choice. This is what Duke does (and most religious people) and tbh you're doing it by playing the "oh please don't godwin me" card tbh. As said before, the religious people I've got more sympathy for are those that actually thought out their argument and actually debate and evaluate. Even if they're wrong then, they're not simply going "I'm right, why won't you convert damnit, clearly you want to be converted cause I'm right and you're argueing with me!?" like Duke does. I can simply not bring up any sympathy or respect for this attitude and that's the point I was making: took someone I was pretty sure of you could not get much sympathy for. Of course, I could have gone for Khadaffi as well. Same thing really. |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #682 | |||
Lieutenant General
|
Someone with an intellect of 160 making an incredibly dumb statement is - on that subject - not getting more or less sympathy from me than someone with an IQ of 12 making the same statement. That wouldn't be fair. So no, again, their mental condition wouldn't affect anything at all because that's not what I'm a debate for to judge. If I do that, you stop taking the other's person's argument serious and I find that disrespectful. That's one of the reasons I'm actually returning people like Duke with an argumented, though irritated opinion: just saying people are making a fool out of themselves without argument would be acting just as dismissive as they are and trolling. Argueing why people are making a fool out of themselves gives you the right to use (strong) qualifications, IMO. But when I do, those only apply on this subject. Typically you'll find they can act completely normal on other topics, just incredibly childish and self-protective on topics that determine their very morals and ethics. It wouldn't be right to excuse someone from making dumb remarks just because they're dumb (then they shouldn't make such remarks in the first place - I'd like to say have them the right to vote revoked... tbh, if there was a non-subjective test for that) or excusing some child hitting another kid in school because he has such cute puppy dog eyes. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #684 | |||
Lieutenant General
|
|
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #685 | ||||||||
Lieutenant General
|
![]()
NOTHING excuses you from murder. NOTHING.
It's only more likely to make my eyes roll.
What it is though, is stubborness and denial regarding external input that did not meat the selection criteria. Basically someone selected which sources are trustworthy. Whether this person or someone else, selection criteria are a choice, even if subconscious, even if indoctrinated. If someone is incapable of changing the criteria or looking at their own critically, it doesn't matter if they're smart or dumb: they stick with something and that means they can never have my sympathy on that matter. Think I said it before, but I built up sympathy regarding a person based on actions, intend and statements, mental capacity (like any other handicap) has nothing to do with that. Which means I can like very deluded, incapable people for being extremely kind and trying to understand the world they live in, even if they can't. They should at least try if they have even the least bit capacity to and accept they might be wrong.
It all starts with resistent cells. |
||||||||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #686 | ||
You aren't in your right mind (or is it left mind?) when drunk or high, yet the punishments for those tend to be higher. Is that because they choose to accept responsibility for their actions by default or because it isn't really about the state your mind is in, but rather the state of mind you were in before it changed to something less... common sensible.
To me, not even mental problems are a reason to alter the perception of the action. If you kill someone while batshit insane, okay, you just go to a different prison than 'normal' people do. No truncated sentencing, no insanity (temporary or otherwise) defense, and no 'he didn't know what he was doing' appeals. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #689 | ||||
Private
|
Sympathy is just care or concern for another, it has nothing to do with excusing. Punishment should not be about anger, so in that context it's a useless emotion. Regardless of whether your goal is rehabilitation or setting an example punishment should be dispassionate. Additionally we know that rewards work better than punishment for teaching appropriate behavior. |
||||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #690 | ||
I wasn't referring to how I'd sentence them, personally. I was referring to how I'd view people like Hitler or whoever who did terrible stuff but had a neurological disorder of some description which lead to their aberrant behaviour. I'm aware of the purpose of criminal justice and its purpose in society, but thanks for the pro tip anyway.
|
|||
![]() |
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|