A Beautiful Schizophrenia [was: Re: AI Eureka!]

Jim Balter jqb at exodus.net
Wed Jun 5 14:48:58 EST 2002


J Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
> Jim Balter wrote:
> 
> > J Ahlstrom wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > US District Court Judge Richard Posner wrote something like:
> > >
> > >    Anything we do to increase the numbere of guilty
> > >    we convict will increase the number of innocent we convict.
> > >    Anything we do to increase the number of innocent we acquit
> > >    will increase the number of guilty we acquit.
> > > Posner, Richard
> > >     Problems of Jurisprudence,
> > >     Harvard Press, 1993
> >
> > If he wrote that then he's an idiot; it implies that, if the number of
> > convictions is held constant, then the ratio of innocent to guilty
> > among the convicted cannot be changed -- we might as well have a quota
> > for the numnber of convictions, and pick who gets convicted randomly.
> > That would certainly reduce the cost of the court  system.
> >
> > Anyone who would write such a thing is a nincompoop, and anyone who
> > would quote it verges on being a nincompoop.
> > Of course it isn't really nincompoopery at work here,
> > but rather rationalizations by the mean-spirited for
> > why we should do nothing about injustice.
> >
> > --
> > <J Q B>
> 
> He is stating that to increase the number of convictions - not
> holding that number constant.  Where did you get that idea.

Jeez, you're more stupid than I could have imagined.  Is the
word "implies" not in your vocabulary?  Posner in fact says
nothing about a change in the number of convictions --
only in the number of guitly convicted and the number
of innocent acquited.  Clearly one can hold the total
number convicted constant and yet change both the number
of guilty convicted and the number of innocent acquited
by changing who gets convicted.  Which is exactly what
I pointed out, numbskull.

> If that gives you a new understanding, does that mean
> you don't think Posner is a nincompoop (at least for that reason)
> and that I don't verge on being one (at least for that reason)?

No, you're well past being a nincompoop.

-- 
<J Q B>




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list