Are brain implants the future of treatment for depression and anxiety?

[confused2]

Really? Compared to her boyfriend getting over a year in prison?
If anyone had any sense, if she gets off, he should too. But our society doesn't care what happens to men.

SS presented a simple question about someone running over a pile of leaves and killing two children hidden beneath the leaves. Possible consequences lie somewhere between none and public stoning at the conclusion of the trial. I suggested my own solution to the problem as presented. There happens to be a real situation which involves the 'pile of leaves' and 'the pile of leaves with two children concealed within' which also includes a brother, a boyfriend and attempts to conceal the facts which I consider to be somewhat separate from the central point of killing two girls concealed in a pile of leaves.

[Syne]

Neighbors had raked the pile of leaves near the curb for leaf pick-up. The leaves were in the road across the street from their house. The father was taking pictures of them playing in the leaves. He went back into the house to put his camera away. The parents pleaded with the court to not have her convicted or deported. She was here legally since the age of 4 under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

If the leaves were actually "in the road," the parents are guilty of criminal negligence. Although a jury may find the grief of their loss genuine enough to avoid further punishment.

DACA is deferred action, not suspended action. If given that chance, people are not working to become legal citizens, that's on them. And many DACA recipients and illegal aliens (which are encouraged to break immigration law by just such policies) are guilty of horrid crimes.

[Secular Sanity]

Neighbors had raked the pile of leaves near the curb for leaf pick-up. The leaves were in the road across the street from their house. The father was taking pictures of them playing in the leaves. He went back into the house to put his camera away. The parents pleaded with the court to not have her convicted or deported. She was here legally since the age of 4 under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

If the leaves were actually "in the road," the parents are guilty of criminal negligence. Although a jury may find the grief of their loss genuine enough to avoid further punishment.

DACA is deferred action, not suspended action. If given that chance, people are not working to become legal citizens, that's on them. And many DACA recipients and illegal aliens (which are encouraged to break immigration law by just such policies) are guilty of horrid crimes.

Oh, now it’s the fault of the parents.

I think that we have the tendency to look at other people’s misfortune to try pinpoint the exact cause. If we can find a reason as to why it happened, we can avoid it ourselves, or more succinctly, we can allow ourselves to believe that it would never happen to us because we would never make that mistake. Things often work out in unforeseeable ways that shouldn’t reflect negatively on the individual. Aristotle’s key ingredients for a tragedy contained a decent person that’s prone to making small mistakes as we all do.

[Syne]

If the leaves were actually "in the road," the parents are guilty of criminal negligence. Although a jury may find the grief of their loss genuine enough to avoid further punishment.

DACA is deferred action, not suspended action. If given that chance, people are not working to become legal citizens, that's on them. And many DACA recipients and illegal aliens (which are encouraged to break immigration law by just such policies) are guilty of horrid crimes.

Oh, now it’s the fault of the parents.

That was my very first response to that story, dumbass:

If it were in the road, it would be the parents' fault...and letting children play too close to a road could still partially be.

Try to keep up.

I think that we have the tendency to look at other people’s misfortune to try pinpoint the exact cause. If we can find a reason as to why it happened, we can avoid it ourselves, or more succinctly, we can allow ourselves to believe that it would never happen to us because we would never make that mistake. Things often work out in unforeseeable ways that shouldn’t reflect negatively on the individual. Aristotle’s key ingredients for a tragedy contained a decent person that’s prone to making small mistakes as we all do.

Everything that happens has a cause. That's the whole point of determinism. That means that every misfortune does have an identifiable cause, whether it is due to anyone's actions or not. If you're claiming leaving your kids "in the road," hidden by leaves, has nothing to do with any choice of the parent, you're clearly delusional. Only a complete moron would say the outcome of leaving your children in the road hidden by leaves is completely unforeseeable. Makes me wonder what gross lapses of judgement you are seeking to be absolved yourself for. Or maybe you're just incapable of estimating likely consequences. That would fit with your penchant of not holding yourself accountable.

Aristotle was talking about poetry/literature/theater, not real life tragedies. But then, the delusional, by definition, have trouble separating fact from fiction.

[Secular Sanity]

I highly doubt that he left them hiding in the leaves. If they were hiding, they were probably hiding for when he returned.

[Image: 51755143336_64355ff8c3_z.jpg]

Greek tragedy is about how we live in a flawed and unjust universe that’s full of suffering. It’s about real people making bad decision often for good reasons, who suffer a disaster.

Sadly, your hellfire and brimstone says a lot you.

[Syne]

I highly doubt that he left them hiding in the leaves. If they were hiding, they were probably hiding for when he returned.

What part of "leave your kids in the road" isn't bad enough for you? And you've never seen or been a kid playing in leaves enough to know that they like to hide in them? Seriously, get a little dose of reality, deary.

Greek tragedy is about how we live in a flawed and unjust universe that’s full of suffering. It’s about real people making bad decision often for good reasons, who suffer a disaster.

Sadly, your hellfire and brimstone says a lot you.

Art often tries to imitate life, but art isn't life. If you believe in complete determinism, you cannot also believe that the universe is flawed. What introduces such flaws? Only doe-eyed idealists expect the universe to be just, because, if anything, the universe "just is." And people largely create their own suffering, in the modern first-world, just like the father in this incident did. You can't say he had a "good reason" for leaving his kids in the road. At best, you could say he was careless or unthinking.

Predictably, you projecting your own complete lack of accountability of everyone else just proves you can't be deemed an adult, responsible for your own actions. Hence why you always effectively argue, often by demonstration, that women are essentially children. As with you, we don't expect children to be wholly accountable for their actions.

So what did you do that was so terrible that you have to go to these lengths to excuse it?

[Magical Realist]

How is Syne an authority on ethics when he can't even post without insulting and personally attacking anyone who disagrees with him?

[Syne]

How is Syne an authority on ethics when he can't even post without insulting and personally attacking anyone who disagrees with him?

Some people conveniently forget about years of people insulting me first. At some point, you just quit caring about the sensitivities of shitty people. You and SS proved that you certainly wouldn't refrain from name-calling.
You know, aside from the fact that name-calling is only unethical if it's being used in lieu of argument to refute another's claim, as in poisoning the well or ad hominem. Since I always counter the arguments given, name-calling is just an expression of disdain.

[Magical Realist]

Not every post is an argument to angrily attack. Many are just discussions, you know...as in "Discussion Group"?

Since I always counter the arguments given, name-calling is just an expression of disdain.

dis·dain
/disˈdān/

noun
the feeling that someone or something is unworthy of one's consideration or respect; contempt.
"her upper lip curled in disdain"

Yep... that pretty much sums up your default attitude..

[Syne]

I mean the words I use. Example of shitty people name-calling:

Says the official party of racist, misogynistic, homophobic, islamophobic, nativist, xenophobic, tax-evading, gun-toting a-holes.

And not my problem if you think my opinions are attacks. Weak people often see any disagreement as an attack, and are unable to have a rational discussion beyond such disagreement. That's your own personal problem. The world does not exist to affirm your beliefs.