[ExI] Implications of Sociopath Testing

[Mike Dougherty]

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> You use the phrase "in all fairness". Do you consider your act to be
> in all fairness to the future victims of this known sociopath?

Yes.  'future victims'?   Can you show with high confidence over a
statistically large sample the exact metric that determines what score
on the sociopath test indicates not just a tendency or a likelihood,
but a near certainty that said sociopath will victimize others?  Does
this study account for the increased surveillance the state will have
after labeling someone a sociopath?  Maybe after this kind of evidence
can be produced then I would agree.  Until then, it seems you are
suggesting the blindfold on Lady Justice is compensated for by an ear
for hearsay.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> But my question clearly relates to a sociopath who has not successfully
> internalized good behavior.

So you mean our policy will be changed to "innocent until preemptively
tested for guilt"?

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> Of course, you are bringing up an entirely different question here
> from the one I posed. In this case, you are entering into the delicate
> question of whether children, say, ought to be compulsorily tested
> in order to determine their sociopathic tendencies.
> And your examples are even further afield, namely, for what possible
> reason would anyone outside the immediate family have an interest
> in chromosomal gender or sexual orientation? Clearly the libertarian
> answer is that such testing should be entirely voluntary, and, if desired,
> the results remain unavailable to others. Well, for adults, I mean.

  Sorry, I understood your testing scenario to be a requirement for
entering the public education system - you know, for the safety of the
children and the community in general.  And once you have them in for
testing, lets test for the likelihood of committing insurance fraud or
the tendency to drink too much or violate any of the best practices
prescribed by the Ministry.
  My example of chromosomal gender comes from the controversial
testing done on professional female athletes.  As you suggest, this
should be nobody's business; but that's clearly not possible in a
mistrustful world.  Sexual orientation might be the same kind of
preemptive testing to preclude potentially threatening (or merely
embarrassing) situations - while this status is protected in the US
today, if the kind of definitive test I describe above became legally
admissible that condition might be challenged.  Has Megan's Law
reduced the number of repeat offenders? At what cost? [1]

To be honest, I would never want judge - for these (and other) decisions.

[1] I don't enjoy discussing the dark nature of criminal behavior, but
this page illustrates the point I was trying to make about our loss of
liberty for the sake of public safety:
http://ericrichardson.com/verbal/megans_law/