Well let me see. No I don't have a "character" or "personality" analysis of MacAskill that indicates the "type" of person he is. I don't think that psychology has a good enough handle on character and personality to produce a very valid one, and anyway I wouldn't be qualified to conduct one since I'm not in clinical.
So, my assessment is my opinion based on how I read the situation (as are many of the posts by many of the posters in TIPS). Nevertheless it is an assessment that seems reasonable. The big question to me is how is it compassionate to have "compassion" on a single individual when doing so will cause great grief and sufferring to hundreds of others? I maintain that MacAskill's decision to deliberately and knowingly force great grief and suffering upon hundreds of people (including many of his own countrymen) for the sake of having "compassion" on a single individual who committed mass murder is a farce and has nothing to do with "compassion". Rather, as a representative of the people in issues of justice he is a total and complete failure. To pile up all sorts of 'considerations' and torturous judgement processes poor MadAskill had to go through in this decision is merely to try to obscure the central issue of his misguided and malicious judgement. He could well have done the responsible and truly compassionate thing and stamped the application: "Application denied". We will never know his true motivation which could range from twisted libertarian ethics, to a desire for notoriety to blackmail. But it certainly shouldn't be recorded as "compassion" when he alone willingly and willfully forced additional grief and suffering on hundreds of individuals who have already suffered greatly. --Mike --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
