From: John K Clark (jonkc@att.net)
Date: Mon Jul 29 2002 - 14:08:36 MDT
"Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>
> If it turned out that a substantial fraction of criminal behavior was
> due to a genetic disorder, this would greatly influence detection,
> prevention and rehabilitation. We could cure some criminal behaviors
> with medical science.
If we found that the root cause of human evil was in the genes it is not
clear to me that a technological fix would be easier to arrange than if the
problem was caused by the environment, if fact the very opposite seems more
likely.
> I don't believe any criminal behavior is directly genetic.
I don't think any behavior, criminal or otherwise, is directly linked to
genes but I would be astonished if traits like the ability to feel empathy,
intelligence, and the willingness to take risks did not have a strong
genetic component.
"Emlyn O'regan" <oregan.emlyn@healthsolve.com.au> Wrote:
>Say that it is as bad to let a convicted murderer kill again as it is to
>execute an innocent man. You would execute 52,000 people to save 821.
>Therefore, no more than 821 of the 52,000 must be innocent, or else you
>are in the wrong (by your own maths). Are you confident that the legal
>system is 98.5% correct about murderers?
That's 821 murder CONVICTIONS, the actually number of murders committed
after a first murder conviction is undoubtedly much higher. Also that
doesn't count the people convicted of man slaughter who later murdered. You
understand the distinction, if you chop my head off with an ax while
thinking brutal thoughts then it's murder, if you chop my head off with an
ax while thinking happy thoughts then it's man slaughter. Of course
everybody knows there is a world of difference between the two,
a difference to everyone except me that is, I'm just as dead either way.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:45 MST