Michael Perelman wrote:

I don't think that craziness is relevant to the evaluation of a
person.  I would not
change my mind about Bush if someone convinced me that he were
mentally unbalanced or
if he were healthy.  At the same time, I think that mental states are
relevant in
forgiving people.

I explicitly said earlier:

to treat money-making or "goods" in the
utility function sense as the end of life is itself a mistake, a
mistake expressing the same psychopathology as the unrealistic means
adopted in their pursuit.

This last point explains why the idea of willing as psychopathological
is inconsistent with the idea of it as "evil."  Individuals doing bad
things are mistaken about what they ought to be doing, not evil.

Why, in your judgment, are believers in Rapture supporting Bush's policies in the Middle East?

Psychopathology is relevant to understanding thought and action as in
Marx's explanation of the coup d'etat of Napoleon III in terms of the
prejudice and superstition of French peasants.

Braverman cites a study of Taylor's psychopathology by S. Kakar:
Frederick Taylor: a study in personality and innovation.

I pointed to an online survey essay by Robert Young that indicates how
a particular approach to psychopathology can be used to explain
organizational structures and practices.

Ted

Reply via email to