I remember reading that toxoplasmosis might also cause people to be engaging in more risk-taking behaviors. How do you even factor that, or similar behavior-altering parasites into a legal situation?
How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
11–18 of 18 posts
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#12Free will is an illusion. Culpability and responsibility in the moral sense is the wrong question. To put a really fine point on it, whether a person is psychotic and violent because of brain tumor or some other neural or biochemical defect, in neither case can they reasonably be considered the cause of their own psychosis. Nobody "makes" themselves psychotic intentionally, the same way you cannot cure such a conditi…
A brain tumor is most likely a death sentence.
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#13Free will is an illusion. Culpability and responsibility in the moral sense is the wrong question. To put a really fine point on it, whether a person is psychotic and violent because of brain tumor or some other neural or biochemical defect, in neither case can they reasonably be considered the cause of their own psychosis. Nobody "makes" themselves psychotic intentionally, the same way you cannot cure such a conditi…
A brain tumor is most likely a death sentence.
There are actually plenty of brain tumors that are slow growing and do not lead to short term fatality.
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#14For an interesting read that touches on this question, see Saturday by Ian McKewan[0]
[0] https://smile.amazon.com/Saturday-Ian-McEwan/dp/1400076196/r...
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#15Free will is an illusion. Culpability and responsibility in the moral sense is the wrong question. To put a really fine point on it, whether a person is psychotic and violent because of brain tumor or some other neural or biochemical defect, in neither case can they reasonably be considered the cause of their own psychosis. Nobody "makes" themselves psychotic intentionally, the same way you cannot cure such a conditi…
A brain tumor is most likely a death sentence.
Had mine surgically removed going on 10 years ago. Not dead yet!
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#16Free will is an illusion. Culpability and responsibility in the moral sense is the wrong question. To put a really fine point on it, whether a person is psychotic and violent because of brain tumor or some other neural or biochemical defect, in neither case can they reasonably be considered the cause of their own psychosis. Nobody "makes" themselves psychotic intentionally, the same way you cannot cure such a conditi…
A brain tumor is most likely a death sentence.
No, a relative had one 40 years ago. He is fine now.
There was an article on here recently about a teenager with a highly malignant one, traveling to meet Gorbachev in 1988. The teenager is now ~50.
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#17There was a RadioLab episode touching on this [0], with a significant change of behavior following surgery for epilepsy. Disturbing listening, so be warned.
[0] https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/segments/31762...
Re: How should society judge a defendant with a brain tumor? (2017)
#18You cannot have a full conversation about the brain and criminal justice without mentioning Robert Sapolsky, whose research has been at the forefront of this field for decades.
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/magazine/11Neurolaw.t.htm...