5 ms·

What if they did the murder because of a brain tumor messing up their impulse control ability? Humans are just complicated machines that go wrong sometimes. I d

What if they did the murder because of a brain tumor messing up their impulse control ability? Humans are just complicated machines that go wrong sometimes. I do however share your emotional position and it would make me feel better to see (actual) murderers get the death penalty.

spoonjim 6y ago
Someone disabled to the point of having no compass for right and wrong would have what is legally known as “diminished mental capacity” and not be convicted of first degree murder. If you genuinely hallucinate that I am an attacking Pit Bull and kill me, you are not guilty of first degree murder and I would not want you executed.
- fighterpilot 6y ago
  > “diminished mental capacity” As we learn more about neuroscience, every murderer will look like they have "diminished mental capacity". This legal construct is merely a statement of our ignorance to understand what's actually going on in their brain.
  - spoonjim 6y ago
    Sure, free will may not exist, but we don’t have much of a civilization if we don’t pretend that it does.
    - fighterpilot 6y ago
      The criminal justice system can still function without the false premise of free will and agency, and without the false premise that someone with a brain tumor magically has less agency than someone without a brain tumor but who has some more complicated and less understood problem with their brain. It can be premised on concepts such as rehabilitation (which I believe mostly can't happen with murderers), deterrence, creating a sense of fairness in society (which builds trust), protecting people from the murderer, and so on.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      It might not go that bad. But I suspect that as medical imaging hardware becomes better, we'll eventually face a crisis point: we'll be forced to re-evaluate most of what we call "character traits" and reclassify them as neurochemistry quirks. This is an important distinction, because as a society, we tend to hold people responsible for their character, but not for bugs in their brain. We can already see some of this today. Many people that would've been shunned by society in the past as "unstable" and "crazy", can be fixed by giving them lithium. We know not to fault a person for what's just a bug in their hardware. Similarly, many people that today are called "lazy" or "annoying", and blamed for their obviously flawed character, can be instantly fixed by low doses of stimulant medication. This is something most people didn't get a memo on yet. I find it highly likely that most homicides are also driven by fixable neurochemistry quirks, and that we'll learn to identify and fix them at some point, and we'll be appalled at the ease with which we jumped to killing people for having them.
    - svieira 6y ago
      How do we choose to pretend free will exists?
      - spoonjim 6y ago
        By rewarding people who help others and punishing people who hurt others.
throwaway3699 6y ago
They're still a danger to society. If we start crossing into the metaphysical then we'd have to make excuses for peadophiles having 'messed up impulse control' too. But as another comment pointed out, we do account for this.
- fighterpilot 6y ago
  > They're still a danger to society Which is one of the reasons why we have incarceration, which I believe is absolutely necessary in some form in a case where a person is a danger to others (whether or not it's "their fault"). > we'd have to make excuses for peadophiles having 'messed up impulse control' too. It's not an excuse, it's more a description of reality. And it would apply to child abusers as well, as well as other criminals, yes. This isn't an argument against "punishing" these people. It's an argument for being clear about why we are "punishing" them, to make sure it's not a revenge motive (which is a heavily biologically driven motive in itself)
- wanderingstan 6y ago
  It’s not metaphysical, there are documented cases of biological causes (tumor) causing pedophilia: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2943-brain-tumour-causes-uncontrollable-paedophilia/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2943-brain-tumour-cau...
- Sebb767 6y ago
  > They're still a danger to society. That's a different argument. The OP said it he'd like muderers to have a fate similar to their victims, basically as revenge. When executing someone for this reason, their guilt clearly does matter - someone who enjoys killing is far worse than someone with a medical condition. Whether their death is 'practical' is a different matter.

spoonjim 6y ago

Someone disabled to the point of having no compass for right and wrong would have what is legally known as “diminished mental capacity” and not be convicted of first degree murder. If you genuinely hallucinate that I am an attacking Pit Bull and kill me, you are not guilty of first degree murder and I would not want you executed.

fighterpilot 6y ago
> “diminished mental capacity” As we learn more about neuroscience, every murderer will look like they have "diminished mental capacity". This legal construct is merely a statement of our ignorance to understand what's actually going on in their brain.
- spoonjim 6y ago
  Sure, free will may not exist, but we don’t have much of a civilization if we don’t pretend that it does.
  - fighterpilot 6y ago
    The criminal justice system can still function without the false premise of free will and agency, and without the false premise that someone with a brain tumor magically has less agency than someone without a brain tumor but who has some more complicated and less understood problem with their brain. It can be premised on concepts such as rehabilitation (which I believe mostly can't happen with murderers), deterrence, creating a sense of fairness in society (which builds trust), protecting people from the murderer, and so on.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    It might not go that bad. But I suspect that as medical imaging hardware becomes better, we'll eventually face a crisis point: we'll be forced to re-evaluate most of what we call "character traits" and reclassify them as neurochemistry quirks. This is an important distinction, because as a society, we tend to hold people responsible for their character, but not for bugs in their brain. We can already see some of this today. Many people that would've been shunned by society in the past as "unstable" and "crazy", can be fixed by giving them lithium. We know not to fault a person for what's just a bug in their hardware. Similarly, many people that today are called "lazy" or "annoying", and blamed for their obviously flawed character, can be instantly fixed by low doses of stimulant medication. This is something most people didn't get a memo on yet. I find it highly likely that most homicides are also driven by fixable neurochemistry quirks, and that we'll learn to identify and fix them at some point, and we'll be appalled at the ease with which we jumped to killing people for having them.
  - svieira 6y ago
    How do we choose to pretend free will exists?
    - spoonjim 6y ago
      By rewarding people who help others and punishing people who hurt others.

throwaway3699 6y ago

They're still a danger to society. If we start crossing into the metaphysical then we'd have to make excuses for peadophiles having 'messed up impulse control' too. But as another comment pointed out, we do account for this.

fighterpilot 6y ago
> They're still a danger to society Which is one of the reasons why we have incarceration, which I believe is absolutely necessary in some form in a case where a person is a danger to others (whether or not it's "their fault"). > we'd have to make excuses for peadophiles having 'messed up impulse control' too. It's not an excuse, it's more a description of reality. And it would apply to child abusers as well, as well as other criminals, yes. This isn't an argument against "punishing" these people. It's an argument for being clear about why we are "punishing" them, to make sure it's not a revenge motive (which is a heavily biologically driven motive in itself)
wanderingstan 6y ago
It’s not metaphysical, there are documented cases of biological causes (tumor) causing pedophilia: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2943-brain-tumour-causes-uncontrollable-paedophilia/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2943-brain-tumour-cau...
Sebb767 6y ago
> They're still a danger to society. That's a different argument. The OP said it he'd like muderers to have a fate similar to their victims, basically as revenge. When executing someone for this reason, their guilt clearly does matter - someone who enjoys killing is far worse than someone with a medical condition. Whether their death is 'practical' is a different matter.