Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (15100)	6/20/2002 5:22:35 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

I might agree with you, EXCEPT (there's always that "except") that there is nothing even remotely resembling objectivity in determining mental illness. Nothing. The defense and prosecution put their pet witch doctors on the stand and whoever gets believed wins. At some point (maybe soon), it may actually be possible to objectively determine whether someone is mentally ill. The equivalent of determining whether someone is having a heart attack. You stick in the catheter, inject the radio-opaque dye and VOILA! there are the cardiac arteries. Now you can see blockages. But we're not there yet. Instead you have a bunch of guys who think the guy who designed the Washington Monument clearly had an Oedipus COmplex and was trying to attract his mother telling the jury whether the guy is sane or not. AND there's another argument: Whether the perp is sane or not, the victim is still dead. And the shrinks won't change that.