4 ms·
it's not controversial at all, the answer is simple: no. even assuming it's beneficial, who would define who's a psychopath and who isn't?
by LoSboccacc 8y ago
it's not controversial at all, the answer is simple: no.
even assuming it's beneficial, who would define who's a psychopath and who isn't?
- chasd00 8y agoI wish I could upvote a comment more than once because this is very important. I feel more and more ideas are floated around and taken seriously that involve punishment based on a categorization that's largely subjective and where the authority is granted to a mob. This AskHN mentions sociopathy which anyone can declare anyone else as sociopathic by cherry picking personality traits and past experiences. The answer is No. Always. Unless someone is infringing on someone else's rights or breaking the law of the land they are free to live their life as they see fit. Period.
- benmmurphy 8y agoBasically if we institute this rule its very likely the sociopaths will just ban all their enemies from business/etc. Nice job. I guess you will get some sociopaths banned but mostly because they were enemies of other sociopaths.
- CM30 8y agoThe judgement side wouldn't be done by a person, but by an automated DNA test. So I'm thinking of a situation where (in theory) there'd be no way to game the system on an accuracy level, since it'd be based on a scientific fact. Of course, that doesn't stop it being abused for exactly what you say, since someone has to write the code or what not.