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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (53731)	8/3/2002 11:29:49 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I am not clear on how responsible any of us are for our decisions. We are cast in a mold by our DNA and then acted upon by our surroundings. We know that certain pathways in our brains freeze up and solidify at certain ages. "Responsibility", or our ownership of our choices, may just be a silly human conceit. I think it is quite possible that it is. However as a conceit it probably has some influence on some people, but not on all. I don't think most people could handle any other mental framework- so we probably need to act as if we are "responsible". I'm not sure IQ should have anything to do with it. Also because of the amazing errors people are prone to make, on top of their ability to justify just about any value system they happen to be born into, or glom on to, it is probably wise to be as humane as possible with regard to how you punish the "irresponsible"- however your society happens to define them (and as we know there is a lot of vaiance here).

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (53731)	8/3/2002 3:27:51 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

any person with an IQ of (say) 70 or less cannot be held responsible for their actions... it must then follow that such persons cannot be permitted to live freely in a society... Whoa. You jumped over a few steps there. We don't seem to be able to hold rich and famous people responsible, either. Would you propose we eliminate them, too. We don't hold the mentally ill responsible. Should we kill them all preemptively? And we cannot hold small children responsible, so I guess we have to preemptively get rid of them, too...

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (53731)	8/4/2002 12:13:02 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 82486

Actually, there is a point where severely retarded people are deemed incapable of living without some sort of supervision, and restricted to group homes or half- way houses. There is nothing novel in the idea that someone with severe cognitive problems cannot be held to appreciate the consequences of his actions adequately. There is a reason, after all, that we treat very young offenders differently than adults: because they are not mature enough to act with full responsibility.