instead of endlessly debate what brain dysfunction we're talking about, we can go with a specific example.
from wikipedia:
the prefrontal cortex: "his brain region has been implicated in planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making and moderating social behavior.[1] The basic activity of this brain region is considered to be orchestration of thoughts and actions in accordance with internal goals."


so say someone gets hit in the forehead with a baseball bat and suffers a lot of damage to their prefrontal cortex. their personality is said to have changed because they start doing wild things that seem completely out of character for that person.

I honestly don't know. One of my co-workers, her husband had brain surgery almost 18 months ago to remove a huge tumor (thankfully it was not cancerous or malignant). He is only now able to hold down a job and drive, and he has regained his motor functions and so on, but his personality is different and he has a great deal of difficulty with some abstract concepts, including cause and effect. He literally doesn't understand much of the time the consequences of his actions. And it's unclear if he'll ever truly regain that. He also doesn't understand that some things are wrong/illegal. He is very much like a child in many ways. But at the same time..."he had brain surgery/brain injury" shouldn't just be a free pass to do whatever you want. I just...don't know where the line should be drawn.

 

-----signature-----

No they can't be held accountable. Thread

 

-----signature-----

It's such a massively complex organ that no two cases could be the same. While many people would still be legally sane, their actions would be all over the board.

 

-----signature-----

Technically, every single thing that makes people do wrong or bad things is due to an organic problem in the brain. So by that logic, nobody should be accountable for any of their actions.

 

-----signature-----

The only things that need to be considered are.

Whatever the person did wrong, at the time were they able to make judgements on right and wrong?

If the malady is a constant thing, and not temporary, is the person able to make good judgements on what is right and wrong?

Was there some kind of problem that caused the person to believe they were under attack?

 

-----signature-----

I believe you are always responsible for your actions no matter what.  To me the question has always been about whether the punishment should be the same and I don't believe it should be in certain situations.

 

-----signature-----

The problem I have with all the cases of insanity pleas or whatever is it doesn't change the fact that someone died that wouldn't have died otherwise and that (assuming this is the case) wasn't doing anything that deserved death. So Billy Bonko throws a gasket and drives over a crowd I don't care if he was sane or not at the time he needs to be removed from society so that it doesn't happen again. Call it a punishment or call it common sense. And I don't mean removed from society to a padded cell for a couple months until he convinces everyone he is all better.

 

-----signature-----

And it gets worse the more people realize there really is no God out there and afterlife and other BS and that we only get ONE SHOT at life.

When we realize this, life becomes even more dearer.

 

-----signature-----

read aon_mix's post history, your answer lies within

 

-----signature-----