Even though I am generally opposed to incarceration as a concept, I cannot ignore that this person risked human lives with their bogus tests. That is to me the greatest moral flaw and the core of...
Even though I am generally opposed to incarceration as a concept, I cannot ignore that this person risked human lives with their bogus tests. That is to me the greatest moral flaw and the core of this case: a complete lack of care for their patients health. Lying to investors is not the main ethical concern in my view. Sunny Balwani may face similar repercussions from his trial.
Honest question; Why are you opposed to incarceration as a concept? IMO it's unfortunately sometimes a necessity, although obviously I would still greatly prefer if rehabilitation and societal...
Honest question; Why are you opposed to incarceration as a concept?
IMO it's unfortunately sometimes a necessity, although obviously I would still greatly prefer if rehabilitation and societal reintegration were the primary goals instead of it being used purely as a means of punishment.
p.s. Feel free to not reply if you don't want to discuss it. I won't be offended, since I know this can potentially be a touchy and exhausting subject.
Why wouldn't I respond? ;) In the majority of cases, incarceration is contrary to the most basic of human rights. The main drive for incarceration is a desire to cause suffering rather than a...
Why wouldn't I respond? ;)
In the majority of cases, incarceration is contrary to the most basic of human rights. The main drive for incarceration is a desire to cause suffering rather than a desire to promote rehabilitation. We believe the impious must suffer to appease our emotional needs, our desire for vengeance, schadenfreude, karma, payback, etc.
Incarceration is expensive, and it is possible that just giving people the money would be enough to prevent a lot of crime.
Incarceration removes the criminal from society for a number of years, further marginalizing an individual that, as a criminal, was already removed from our essential notions of ethics and collectivity. Prison time stains someone's history, making it harder for them to resume life as productive members of society. That increases recidivism.
Imprisonment should be reserved for criminals that showed a psychopathic or otherwise persistent disposition to crime and violence that cannot be prevented otherwise. It should be the last recourse for the most egregious cases, not a first-line treatment, like it is in the United States, Rwanda, and Turkmenistan (the top 3 in incarceration rate).
Incarceration is inherently inhumane, and high incarceration is indicative of a profound societal failure.
I wonder how this would be handled in a system focused on rehabilitation instead of punitive imprisonment: is there a way for a mental health professional to treat someone with a dangerous lack of...
I wonder how this would be handled in a system focused on rehabilitation instead of punitive imprisonment: is there a way for a mental health professional to treat someone with a dangerous lack of empathy? Would she just be barred from leading companies in the health sector?
Psychopaths don't respond to psychotherapy, and when they do, they use it to become better liars. Yes but not just that. It would be better to bar her from leading any company whatsoever, in...
is there a way for a mental health professional to treat someone with a dangerous lack of empathy?
Psychopaths don't respond to psychotherapy, and when they do, they use it to become better liars.
Would she just be barred from leading companies in the health sector?
Yes but not just that. It would be better to bar her from leading any company whatsoever, in perpetuity, and also to prevent her from being employed or associated to any company and healthcare organization. Along with financial compensation.
To be frank, Elizabeth Holmes is so dangerous and effective at manipulation that I think imprisonment may be justified and her case.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any reporting that confirms that Elizabeth Holmes was ever diagnosed as a psychopath, it's just a common supposition based on her behaviour.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any reporting that confirms that Elizabeth Holmes was ever diagnosed as a psychopath, it's just a common supposition based on her behaviour.
Absolutely deserved. I'd even argue eleven years is far too little for Holmes. Ross Ulbricht got multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole for less.
Absolutely deserved.
I'd even argue eleven years is far too little for Holmes.
Ross Ulbricht got multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole for less.
Even though I am generally opposed to incarceration as a concept, I cannot ignore that this person risked human lives with their bogus tests. That is to me the greatest moral flaw and the core of this case: a complete lack of care for their patients health. Lying to investors is not the main ethical concern in my view. Sunny Balwani may face similar repercussions from his trial.
Honest question; Why are you opposed to incarceration as a concept?
IMO it's unfortunately sometimes a necessity, although obviously I would still greatly prefer if rehabilitation and societal reintegration were the primary goals instead of it being used purely as a means of punishment.
p.s. Feel free to not reply if you don't want to discuss it. I won't be offended, since I know this can potentially be a touchy and exhausting subject.
Why wouldn't I respond? ;)
In the majority of cases, incarceration is contrary to the most basic of human rights. The main drive for incarceration is a desire to cause suffering rather than a desire to promote rehabilitation. We believe the impious must suffer to appease our emotional needs, our desire for vengeance, schadenfreude, karma, payback, etc.
Incarceration is expensive, and it is possible that just giving people the money would be enough to prevent a lot of crime.
Incarceration removes the criminal from society for a number of years, further marginalizing an individual that, as a criminal, was already removed from our essential notions of ethics and collectivity. Prison time stains someone's history, making it harder for them to resume life as productive members of society. That increases recidivism.
Imprisonment should be reserved for criminals that showed a psychopathic or otherwise persistent disposition to crime and violence that cannot be prevented otherwise. It should be the last recourse for the most egregious cases, not a first-line treatment, like it is in the United States, Rwanda, and Turkmenistan (the top 3 in incarceration rate).
Incarceration is inherently inhumane, and high incarceration is indicative of a profound societal failure.
I wonder how this would be handled in a system focused on rehabilitation instead of punitive imprisonment: is there a way for a mental health professional to treat someone with a dangerous lack of empathy? Would she just be barred from leading companies in the health sector?
Psychopaths don't respond to psychotherapy, and when they do, they use it to become better liars.
Yes but not just that. It would be better to bar her from leading any company whatsoever, in perpetuity, and also to prevent her from being employed or associated to any company and healthcare organization. Along with financial compensation.
To be frank, Elizabeth Holmes is so dangerous and effective at manipulation that I think imprisonment may be justified and her case.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any reporting that confirms that Elizabeth Holmes was ever diagnosed as a psychopath, it's just a common supposition based on her behaviour.
Yes, that is just my opinion.
Absolutely deserved.
I'd even argue eleven years is far too little for Holmes.
Ross Ulbricht got multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole for less.