Ns thinkers, philosophy question.

proZach

proZach

Active member
if i can create a scenario that follows all three of these requirements, i get an extra letter grade on my midterm.

1)some agent performed a bad deed;

2)the agent may legitimately be punished now for that past bad deed; but

3)no trace of the psychological source of her action remains in her psychology.

i'm under the impression that "psychology" means like thought processes. here's what i've come up with.

this guy goes to a hypnotist and tells them to hypnotize himself. he give the hypnotist permission to do anything and the agent says they will take full responsibility for their actions even when he's hypnotized. the hypnosiser guy hypnotizes him and makes him kill someone. then he comes out of hypnosis, without any recollection of killing that person. however he must take responsibility and can be punished.
 
drug induced actions could fit the criteria. Or my dad recently had localized amnesia and forgot the last 3 yrs of his life. Thought i was still in high school
 
she kills someone, then kills herself, obviously she can't remember that... am i right?
 
your description fits well, but so does the drug induced thing, you didnt say what the bad deed had to be, so just misusing a drug could do it, since drugs are illegal, taking them is bad, say she drank too much underage and didnt remember at all what she did that night...would that fit it? im assuming that mental health problems are out of the question right?
 
according to the professor, it can be anything at all. just as long as it deviates from hume's theory of like Legitimacy Constraint. This states that "the legitimacy of punishment now for a bad deed committed in the past requires that the actions have been caused by decisions that still remain in the psychology of the agent"

like, if you possessed by satan (ex. the exorcist), than like that crazy bitch, you won't get "grounded" for killed that priest and yelling at your mom. but we need an example that you would be punished, or punishable offense even though you were possessed, or in a state of temporary insanity.

something you do, that deserves to be punished, however, you have no idea you did it, thus no motives and no knowledge really.
 
the chemical agent in merijuana entered the lungs of marry. marrys parents found the marijuana the next day, which so innocently corrupted mary, and now marrys parents are flushing it down the toilet. because thc lacks any form of memory, it obviously has no memory of it
 
You should whatch the movie psycho. Very similar situation as the one you need to describe.

Here's something from wikipedia that explains it

"At the end of the film, a forensic psychiatrist (Oakland) explains to Lila, Sam and the authorities that Bates's mother, though dead, lives on in Norman's psyche. Norman was so dominated by his mother while she lived, and so guilt-ridden for murdering her eight years earlier, that he tried to erase the crime from his mind by bringing his mother back to life. Physically, this was done by exhuming her corpse and preserving it with his taxidermy skills, thereby inciting a split personality in Norman, creating the persona of his mother. He acts as he believes she would, talks as she would, and even dresses as she would, in an attempt to erase her absence and the guilt. Because Norman was so very jealous of his mother while she lived, his split personality is equally jealous of any woman to whom Norman might be attracted. Norman's psychosis prohibits him from knowing of his mother's crimes or her original demise."
 
kk i came up with something

there is a drug dealer who deals pills (take your pick), and one of his customers overdosed and died on his product and it was traced back to him CSI styles, the dealer does not remember dealing the pills specifically to the person who died because he has so many customers

you could do the same premise except after the dealer sells the guy the pills he suffers from total amnesia (via head trauma or whatever)
 
maybe he would have to say its tylenol and give someone cyanide (sp?) pills. i dunno about that one, anyone here a lawyer?
 
Does the act have to be performed intentionally or can it be a byproduct of negligence?

If it's the latter, drunk driving would work. The immediate source of the event (alcohol impairment) is gone but the negligent conduct of the driver is still present because it will be universally accepted that he was wrong to get drunk and then go for a drive.

But if the act has to be performed with direct intention, then IMO no, there's no situation where you can legitimately punish someone for something that no longer remains in their psychology simply because that can never happen without some outside agent intentionally implanting something in the mind. Things can alter our consciousness but nothing to my knowledge can ever cause a complete discontinuity in our psychology. In the case of amnesia, the memory is gone but the rest of the brain remains intact and functioning as it did before.

In the case of hypnosis/brainwashing I suppose something can be implanted that would lead that person to do something bad, but they can't legitimately be blamed for that. And if they enter into a contract stating that they will be responsible for whatever the hypnotist tells them to do, then the hypnotist is still clearly responsible because the act was done according to his motive. You can't really blame the guy that got hypnotized, even if he did sign some contract.
 
i got one...sleepwalking, you dont have any idea of what youre doing when your sleepwalking... this actually happened once, a guy had a sleepwalking problem and in the middle of the night he was sleepwalking and he killed his wife and kids and in the morning had no idea that he did it
 
drunk person who passes out at the wheel and runs into someone, and wakes up in the hospital with no recollection.
 
I think your proffessor means someone who never thought of doing the bad deed but did it and now deserves punishment.

Which leads to a paradox:

How can someone deserve to be punished if they never ment to do anything wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top