Various Thoughts VIII

More food for thought.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Some conditions that we accept as normal are certainly diseases, even if we all don't feel so – and that includes the views of some who are affected. Take “gender dysphoria” as an example. It has an ICD (International Classification of Diseases) code as well as the American Psychiatric Associations DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) code. In fact some of the medical insurance companies consider it justification for surgery. It's likely that it results from an individual's DNA or a prenatal condition suffered by the mother. In any event, it's not the individual's fault. In fact “fault” is an inappropriate word. People with sicknesses merit understanding and forgiveness rather than blame.

Alcoholics have a disease. So do addicts of other materials – prescribed opioids are in the news nowadays. But somehow, although we're less understanding of them, we accept the concept. The law recognizes the nature of their problem and society seeks non-punitive way of addressing their problems. There are rehabilitation programs, often paid for by the government or covered by insurance companies. Such rehabilitation, of course, is costly, and expenses are paid for by all of us in the form of taxes and insurance premiums. That's not immediately apparent, and we press for greater assistance of the afflicted.

Voyeurs, rapists, and serial killers are also diseased, whether or not we're willing to admit it, but we're unlikely to cut them any slack. We're much more willing to pay for their punishment than to help them. Should we be more understanding or have we gone too far already?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Who's made in whose image? I've been wondering about it. It's a religious issue or, rather, it's many religious issues. Take Zeus, Achilles, Mars, Jupiter, Athena, and all of those folks. People created them, not the opposite. They had all the traits of good guys and bad guys – all the characteristics we had. They were made in “our” image.

Judaism, and, to an extent, its “spin-off” religious, says the opposite. G-d created us and gave us the Torah which documented that process and our early history. Christianity added Jesus, a human G-d figure, but the record that has been passed down was written by people who never knew Jesus, but were able to describe him based on what they heard. And Islam makes no claim of a new or additional deity – only of a prophet. So all their holy documents – all their understanding of G-d – was written by men based on the words of their prophet whose Koran was based on the Jewish bible and its Christian expansion. (I cannot comment on non-“western” religions because I know little about them.)

But what about the original – Judaism? While the Torah is attributed to G-d, it was written by one (or more according to some scholars) human, so even though G-d is asserting creation, and that man was made in His image, our only record of this claim is what we're told by another human being. And the various extrapolations and interpretations of His laws are also provided by our sages – more humans.

So who created whom? And in whose image?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Every now and then we read about a lawsuit that results in huge punitive damages which seem to us to be disproportionate to the injury but are clearly designed to affect the behavior of the defendant in the future. They are fines aimed at making a company with deep pockets think twice before letting its products or its actions harm more of our citizens.

Generally speaking, however, fines are awarded to the government – us – as punishment of offenders. Should punitive damages follow the same pattern? Government lawyers have more resources than private lawyers and their interest in, and work toward, a large punitive settlement, in the public interest, might increase the size of the damages. The plaintiff (and his attorney) are certainly entitled to remuneration for their costs and for damages done, as well as a (small) part of the punitive damages, but the public that was at risk is entitled to the largest part of the fine. Additionally, the recognition by well-funded defendants that they are facing a well-funded government force may result in case settlements at an early time.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Chew on the food (for thought) I've offered. More next time.

May 23, 2017