Posts by Arthur Barnes

🤣

But hey, if it makes you feel any better, crying feels a lot better than it used to... 🙂

Motherfucker - Tool - The Pot

😢

Tool - The Pot



😢

Brandon Price3 said:Let me break this down simply... it goes against everything in criminal law. I'll try to be brief, though it's not easy... 🙂
Basically, for someone to have actually committed a crime under the Penal Code, four conditions must be met:

1. ACTION – To have a crime, there first has to be an action, which is a voluntary act by a person. So, natural forces or animal behavior are totally out. Just thoughts, beliefs, or even just someone's general lifestyle don't count as an "action." And if physical movements happen completely outside of a person's control? Not an action.

2. The action must match the legal definition to fulfill the ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME. This means the specific set of characteristics that define a certain offense.

3. It’s not enough just to meet those elements; the behavior also has to be UNLAWFUL.

4. And even then, you still need GUILT

For us, guilt is the most important part. Look at it this way:
guilt = the subjective connection between the person and the act, which allows us to
hold them accountable...

The presumption of innocence principle = NULLA POENA SINE CULPA (no punishment without guilt)

Section 4 of the Penal Code states: "No one can be punished, nor can any other criminal sanction be applied to them, unless they are guilty of the act committed."
The presumption of innocence combined with the principle of legality forms the foundation of modern criminal law.

THE NORMATIVE UNDERSTANDING OF GUILT IN NEW U.S. LEGISLATION:
Section 39 of the Penal Code: "A person is guilty of a crime if, at the time of the act, they were
COUNTABLE, acting with
INTENT or NEGLIGENCE as prescribed by law for that specific type of guilt, and they were AWARE
or SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE that their
act was PROHIBITED."

Three requirements for guilt must be satisfied:
1. COUNTABILITY
2. INTENT or NEGLIGENCE
3. AWARENESS OF UNLAWFULNESS OR THE POSSIBILITY OF THAT AWARENESS

In our case, countability is the big issue here.

Section 40 – An uncountable person is someone who, at the moment they committed the acts defining the crime, couldn't grasp what they were doing or couldn't control their own will due to mental illness, temporary mental impairment, insufficient mental development, or some other serious mental disorder.
The legal consequence of being uncountable is that no criminal sanction can be applied to them.
However, criminal proceedings are still initiated against an uncountable person because their status can only be determined by a court verdict. After the verdict, if that person poses a direct threat to their own life or the safety of others, provisions regarding involuntary commitment to a psychiatric facility will apply.

So, to sum it up: Uncountable person = no guilt, no guilt, no crime.

Thanks, this top-down style of explaining things is great! So, the judge didn't follow the Penal Code correctly, and I see why everyone is freaking out. But, can you comment on what I said (which would imply changing the Constitution/Penal Code/etc.) regarding the likelihood of the crime happening again?

I get the whole thing about guilt and all, but isn't the state's goal to reduce offenses and protect its citizens in a "socially acceptable" way? I realize what I'm suggesting might not be considered socially acceptable, since most people think it's unfair to punish someone with a severe mental disability. But from the state's perspective, it's not a bad idea... and it could benefit the individual living in society too.

If someone with severe cognitive impairments starts firing a handgun around, and then gets let go because they lack the presumption of innocence... and then they do it again? And again? If you have 1,000 people like that, where does that leave us? These individuals become a threat to both the country and every single citizen. They need to be locked up. The statistical probability of them reoffending is just higher than it is for a neurotypical person. And look, this isn't some eugenicist nonsense... it's just math. The probability is higher because a person with those impairments is out on the street with the opportunity to strike again, whereas a "normal" person is behind bars and the probability drops to zero%...

Let's be real here. Our legal system, just like any other country's, exists to protect its citizens while keeping things stable enough so the government isn't stuck footing massive bills for failing to act (like, if people kept jumping into a volcano every year, the state would have every right to build a giant fence around it, wouldn't they?).

When it comes to stuff like this, I honestly don't see why people with intellectual disabilities should get a pass on these kinds of measures. It's in everyone's best interest—the state's and the public's—to neutralize the threat so the crime doesn't happen again. And the easiest way to do that? Jail or detention. There are basically two ways this plays out:

a) A "normal" person commits public indecency
-> in this case, they're held accountable and get sentence x
b) A person with an intellectual disability commits public indecency
-> this is where people start arguing. You could go either way:
1) Reduce the sentence by treating their condition as a mitigating factor. That seems to be what 99% of people argue for... I haven't checked the stats, just guessing.
2) Treat the condition as an aggravating factor, because if they can't grasp the consequences, there's a higher chance they'll do it again compared to a typical person. That alone should justify a harsher penalty, maybe even double. That's my take.

By that same logic, if someone with an intellectual disability tried to kill someone, I’d actually advocate for a sentence twice as long as a typical person's. Purely because the statistical probability of recidivism is higher... and it's the state's job to protect its people.

Curious to hear your thoughts on this perspective.

Watched it today... didn't really love it. It was okay, I guess. I get what they were doing with the whole "mimicking nature" vibe in that setting, but calling it some groundbreaking idea? Not really. There’s just no heart in it. Because the characters are so thin, I couldn't bring myself to actually care about what was happening.

All those "different tactics" for getting off the island—I suppose if you haven't spent much time studying evolution, that might seem clever (and it gives them an excuse to toss in some cheap philosophy), but for me, nothing there felt new. At least not when it comes to actual evolutionary stable strategies and selection processes.

Gerald Rivera60 said:I think we’re hitting a level-of-explanation issue here.
An answer needs to actually match the scale of the question being asked.
Like, if I ask what this table is made of, telling me "carbon and hydrogen" doesn't really help much... even if it's technically true, it's just not on the same level as my question.
Same thing applies here. Saying human behavior is driven by the pleasure principle might be right, but it doesn't explain why I went on a massive bender yesterday.
To get that answer, you have to look at my personal level—things that might only apply to me and nobody else, given how I was raised and all those other factors.
That's why you have some psychologists looking at general theories that apply to everyone, while others (clinicians) dig into individual cases, using those general principles but focusing on the specific person they're helping.

Sure, that isn't the immediate reason why you drank like a fish, but if we're hunting for the root cause, every single action eventually leads back to the ultimate answer from that first post. 🙂

jadebear72 said:I’d personally pass on that...

If you define it that way, you’d have to completely redefine what we mean by "pain" and "pleasure." It wouldn't just be about how the brain processes stimuli or manages actions anymore... it would go way beyond that.

Think about it... anyone who’s ever gone through school has felt that "aha!" moment at least once. That sudden rush of clarity. It’s just like when you're finally cracking a tough riddle... everything just clicks...

Can we really say people tackle puzzles just because they're chasing that sweet "a-ha!" moment? Or that they hit the books solely to dodge the sting of being left behind... or the frustration of missing out on opportunities because they aren't educated enough? No.

And that's where the problem lies...

Physicists... they study the wave function of matter. They're out there hunting for that one single equation—one master formula that describes every possible state once you have the initial conditions set. You could argue that everything we do... every thought, every decision firing through our electronic brains, even every phenomenon in nature... it's all just the result of the universe's equation. Wouldn't that be the "real" explanation?

The reason all those explanations work is because you can just stretch the definition so far that the theory becomes impossible to disprove. But at the same time... you lose any ability to actually predict anything.

I’d ask you: "predict what I’m going to do next." And you’d just say: "you'll do A, but since you're looking for satisfaction by doing the exact opposite of A, you'll actually do the opposite of A, unless I say... blah, blah blah." You get my point...

That kind of theory doesn't actually help us understand anything... because (a) it fails that basic curiosity test—you know, when a kid asks, "Dad, why does it have to be this way?"—and (b) it gives us zero predictive power. We can't control our environment if we can't plan ahead or solve problems, like finding ways to shield people from discomfort...

Even physicists won't just settle for saying, "because that's what the universal equation says." They aren't satisfied with that. They’ll push further... asking why the equation looks the way it does instead of something else. But engineers? They can't really use a law of nature if it answers every theoretical question but fails to provide any actual calculations or predictable results. Not useful at all...

Then there’s the much better theory that the final answer is just 42... because honestly, it's funny.

I get what you're getting at—or at least I think I do—but I just can't see it your way. Even if everything we do is just some cosmic equation playing out, that math doesn't actually do anything for us. It’s useless to us humans. We can't use it to predict a single move (like you said), and evolution didn't exactly design our brains to solve for the universe's master formula, right...? 😉

You're leaning way too hard into physics and totally ignoring biology. Sure, you can explain plenty of behaviors using game theory math models, but that's not the whole story. In my opinion, the common thread in everything we do is simple: we avoid pain and chase pleasure. That’s just how evolution and natural selection carved us out. The ones who acted against those instincts—like eating poisonous berries just to see what happened—didn't survive to pass on their genes. They were wiped out. We aren't so far removed from animals that these rules don't apply to us... The difference is, we have advanced cognitive processes. Unlike animals, we can actually predict the future—both the immediate stuff and the long term. Because of that, our actions aren't always based on instant gratification, which makes it a lot harder to categorize them as purely "pleasure-seeking"...

Right now, I’m stuck grinding for this exam, and honestly? It sucks. It feels more like pure misery than studying. But looking ahead... if I don't nail this, I fail. Then I lose an entire year of college. That’s even more suffering. If I actually pass, though... man, that'll be huge. Plus, once I've got the knowledge under my belt, I can finally flex it whenever I feel like it...

So what’s actually driving you to write this post? 😉 (forget about the math for a second)

Any smart person should have those exact reasons driving all their moves😕

Thanks everyone, I can actually get some real answers in here 🙂

The question was just pure curiosity, but I still wanted to dig into actual research on the topic, instead of—as usual—getting 100 different opinions from people who don't know the first thing about psychology or scientific studies. Sorry if I came off as rude, didn't mean to... 🙂

Thanks Daniel Wilson5, but honestly, I'd get way more out of having the full paper instead of just the review. Any chance you could dig the whole thing up on PubMed? 🙂

I showed up here thinking this was actually a "natural science" sub, but man, was I wrong. Turns out it's just a circus of idiots.

Thanks for nothing. If I hadn't already tried Googling this myself, I wouldn't have even bothered starting a thread. And if I were trying to act like some big shot, I definitely wouldn't be posting a "help me" thread like this. Whatever. At least now I know what kind of place this is... Good luck with your lives, you're gonna need 👋

Walter Myers4 said:Of course. Someone who thinks fast probably has faster information flow between neurons... higher energy potential... more chance of a short circuit because of all that extra brain activity.

Thanks for the input, Walter Myers4.

Is there any actual scientific paper on this topic?

Harold Adams5 said:-I think people with higher IQs will seek help sooner, so they'll show up more in the statistics

Look, I don't want to sound arrogant or full of myself, but I didn't start this thread to hear everyone's opinions. I just want the facts.

If anyone actually has the data, please just share it with us.

Does this even exist?

I’m talking generally here—is there a higher chance for someone with a high IQ to develop mental health issues? And specifically for certain conditions, like if OCD tends to hit people with higher intelligence more often? If anyone knows...

I'd love some citations to back it up. 👋

brisknomad6 said:who gives a damn
it's your own fault if people don't take you seriously now

just a bunch of idiots 🙄

It’s not my fault if people aren't smart enough to tell when I'm joking versus being serious. Can't fight stupidity...

Thanks for the help, everyone. Feeling a bit better after some beer and tea. 👋

Karen Mendoza20 The user said:What is going on with you? Seriously... the mind does crazy things to your digestion... 🙂

I've been feeling pretty stressed out the last few days... but honestly, I've dealt with way worse stress for much longer without it hitting me like this. So, I don't think it's just nerves. It feels more like some kind of bacterial infection or something...

Actually, let me fix my first post: it wasn't 10 hours, just 5... 😢

I'm not kidding around, dammit... 🙄

Donna Clark77 said:So, what did you even eat, sweetie?
Unwashed lettuce? 🙄

Sounds like you've got an amoeba farm in your gut😬

I honestly don't know if it was washed or not since I didn't make it myself😢

It’s been two weeks... I have no clue when or why exactly this started happening. I doubt it was those homemade kebabs from the deli. Oh, and my stomach started hurting after I sat right in front of the AC vent 😕, maybe I just caught a chill in my gut or something, who knows😢

Ugh 😠

I've been dealing with some mild stomach and gut issues for two weeks now... whatever it is. Anyway, this started back last year with intense stomach pains, and I honestly thought, "Oh crap, did I get salmonella again?" But I don't think so, because I've been stuck at home for two full weeks already. Last year, it was over in three days 😁

Now, it’s different. My stomach feels fine all day, then suddenly it hits me so hard I have to bolt to the bathroom. And while I'm sitting there, I'm passing so much gas that even I can tell my metabolism is totally out of whack... like, how much CO2 can one person produce?

Once I finally empty out, everything goes back to normal and the pain vanishes. Then, about ten hours later, it all starts over again. It’s just constant cycles. The symptoms aren't debilitating since I usually feel okay otherwise, but I really just want to get rid of this crap.

What could this even be? 😢

Steve and I are going 🥳 😎 😉 🙂

Harold King54 said:The test is commercialized

😕

Is that how they make their money, through IQ tests?