Here’s my thoughts. Firstly, this would easily be open to abuse. Just convieniently label someone a psycho and out come the “pair of pliers and a blowtourch” to quote pulp fiction.
I did think of this, but everything is open to abuse i.e. impeachment. I think the law would have to exist at a super-national level to have the best chance of not being abused. Then the “danger” is it would never be used.
Sociopaths have a unique ability…
I think that’s true of all humans.
Ahh I should have said “capacity” in stead of “ability”.. to be clearer. I meant, ability as in “It has been found that long distance runners have a unique ability to remove the by-products of exercise from their bloodstreams” .
In my view, need for revenge is understandable and part of being human, but it’s also a useless emotion. My current belief is that deterrenace is an overrated judicial idea and that the causes of crime lie more in the fact of humans massive moral confusion.
Well revenge on the personal scale is useless. Revenge on a larger scale is not useless if extracting it has a mollifying and unify effect on billions of people who would otherwise seek it for themselves, say. It’s about the control of populations in the wake of some horrendous event.
This justification has been used by all insane regemes throughout history. (I’m not saying you are insane, that would rude and arrogant. I am saying i believe the idea is).
Maybe so. But does it work or doesn’t it? That’s a question that goes to science IMHO.
I think i would see sociopathy as somthing that exists in all human beings to some degree.
That we’re all maybe like this to some degree at times is just the point, only to some degree and only at times.
Sociopathy is defined in terms of behaviours AND persistence AND intensity. In some theories, there’s a unchanging -or very persistent- pathological organic state that underlies the sociopath. If we can identify that, the fact that we all sometimes display these traits en passant is interesting but would not confuse the definition.
Perhaps many things- including hypothetical the underlying organic states which constitute pathology- is transitive and only separated by degree and not kind (meh.. perhaps). But it doesn’t change what they are- nor what they did.
I would argue for example, that believing in a god who tortures people for all eternity is a deeply sociopathic idea.
It’s a crude attempt to control the behaviour of people. My idea is an attempt to control the behaviour of crude - where “crude” is rightly interpreted - people.
I suppose i’m arguing that humans cannot rid the world of sociopathic behavior by behaving in a sociopathic manner.
Yeah I am thinking I agree with this. The goal however, is not to rid, the goal is make less likely. Also to serve as a mollifying agent for an otherwise uncontrollable reaction on the part of a large number of people in the wake of some horrendous event.
I am not set on this idea, which is to say I go back and forth in my own mind. I would take defeat for the pro side in the form of a strong argument from history. For instance, everything you said applies to the death penalty and we have a strong argument against the deterrent effect of the death penalty available to us from history .
In England, they used to hang pickpockets in public and it drew crowds. And who showed up to the hanging? Pickpockets who picked the pockets of the gawkers. So much for the death penalty deterring criminality when that criminality is borne or economic desperation.