Terrorist attack in Oslo

[Tank]

I think he is sane in the sense that he created a logical plan and executed it ruthlessly. The question is, does his total lack of empathy for his fellow humans also constitute a type of insanity, and if so would it be reasonable to use this as a defence?

The total lack of empathy may mean that he is a psychopath (anti-social personality disorder), but that is not insanity. A certain percentage of the population are psychopathic, but can be quite functional and even intelligent in normal situations.  There are probably psychopaths who are also CEO's. They are just ruthless people - they are wired that way.  Note that "psychopathic" does not mean "psychotic", which IS a form of insanity. 

The higher you go in corporate management the more likely you are to come across psychopaths. At board level the concentration of psychopaths is 4 times that of the general population. There was an article on it recently, I'll see if I can dig it up.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

The higher you go in corporate management the more likely you are to come across psychopaths. At board level the concentration of psychopaths is 4 times that of the general population. There was an article on it recently, I'll see if I can dig it up.

Yes, I saw that article, as well.  It's comforting to know that our economy is run by psychopaths.  I suspect that the percentage is also higher among political leaders than in the general population. 

[Too Few Lions]

I think he is sane in the sense that he created a logical plan and executed it ruthlessly. The question is, does his total lack of empathy for his fellow humans also constitute a type of insanity, and if so would it be reasonable to use this as a defence?

The total lack of empathy may mean that he is a psychopath (anti-social personality disorder), but that is not insanity. A certain percentage of the population are psychopathic, but can be quite functional and even intelligent in normal situations.  There are probably psychopaths who are also CEO's. They are just ruthless people - they are wired that way.  Note that "psychopathic" does not mean "psychotic", which IS a form of insanity. 

The higher you go in corporate management the more likely you are to come across psychopaths. At board level the concentration of psychopaths is 4 times that of the general population. There was an article on it recently, I'll see if I can dig it up.

I can well believe it. My experience of many of the the ambitious or career orientated people I know or have met is that they are at least mildly sociopathic, some have definitely had psychopathic personality disorders. On the other hand, all my friends who aren't career orientated, and are more of the laid back hippie / slacker variety, are all very nice well rounded human beings.

[xSilverPhinx]

I think he is sane in the sense that he created a logical plan and executed it ruthlessly. The question is, does his total lack of empathy for his fellow humans also constitute a type of insanity, and if so would it be reasonable to use this as a defence?

The total lack of empathy may mean that he is a psychopath (anti-social personality disorder), but that is not insanity. A certain percentage of the population are psychopathic, but can be quite functional and even intelligent in normal situations.  There are probably psychopaths who are also CEO's. They are just ruthless people - they are wired that way.  Note that "psychopathic" does not mean "psychotic", which IS a form of insanity. 

The higher you go in corporate management the more likely you are to come across psychopaths. At board level the concentration of psychopaths is 4 times that of the general population. There was an article on it recently, I'll see if I can dig it up.

I can well believe it. My experience of many of the the ambitious or career orientated people I know or have met is that they are at least mildly sociopathic, some have definitely had psychopathic personality disorders. On the other hand, all my friends who aren't career orientated, and are more of the laid back hippie / slacker variety, are all very nice well rounded human beings.

I would say that most of the people that fit into that categorisation I've encountered are more pathologically narcissistic than psychopathic, if I had to guess. But the two can and do overlap...

Teachers too. There's something odd about some of them.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Now they are saying he is, in fact, insane.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/29/world/europe/norway-terror-suspect/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[KingPhilip]

I do indeed think he's insane, but how that frees one from a prison sentence or death I still cannot comprehend.

[Tank]

I do indeed think he's insane, but how that frees one from a prison sentence or death I still cannot comprehend.

Insanity is an illness that negates responsibility for one's action. Norway does not have the death penalty so whatever caused him to do what he did will make no difference that he will be incarcerated for the rest of his days.

[Crow]

Whether he was insane or not isn't really the problem for the legal system but rather where do you put him so he may not influence others. Labeling him insane and putting him in a mental hospital would help and easy to do so.

I don't think he was insane, for the simple reason that everything was well thought out and executed ruthlessly to his plan that was years in the making. He didn't act on impulse or act due to any mental disorder, he wrote books about his worldview that have a logical structure (even though they are fucked up). He understood what he was doing was wrong and made sure he hid what he was doing. There is the argument that his disregard for human life could be the signs of his insanity but I don't think so, he viewed the deaths as necessary for the greater good in a political/military sense. Was he a nutter? yes. Was he insane? no.

[KingPhilip]

Norway does not have the death penalty so whatever caused him to do what he did will make no difference that he will be incarcerated for the rest of his days.

The one thing I dislike about Norway. >.>

There is the argument that his disregard for human life could be the signs of his insanity but I don't think so, he viewed the deaths as necessary for the greater good in a political/military sense. Was he a nutter? yes. Was he insane? no.

Is that actually an argument they put forward? If that were the case, then a massive amount of murderers could be declared insane and released from whatever punishment they were given. Even if one does not view death as necessary for a greater good, I don't think that disregard for human life is enough to declare one insane and thus negate the need for proper justice.

[Crow]

Is that actually an argument they put forward? If that were the case, then a massive amount of murderers could be declared insane and released from whatever punishment they were given. Even if one does not view death as necessary for a greater good, I don't think that disregard for human life is enough to declare one insane and thus negate the need for proper justice.

I don't know if they did use it for his defense but it was a subject that Tank brought to the discussion (see below) and an issue that has arisen when I have been talking about this subject with friends.

The question is, does his total lack of empathy for his fellow humans also constitute a type of insanity, and if so would it be reasonable to use this as a defence?

[Stevil]

Pretty much everyone who murders others has a reason why they do it, whether it is mental insanity, phsychopathic, bad upbringing, poverty, anger issues, jealousy...
If we understand the reason for it, does that mean we blame the precursors rather than hold the person accountable for their actions?

[Tank]

Pretty much everyone who murders others has a reason why they do it, whether it is mental insanity, phsychopathic, bad upbringing, poverty, anger issues, jealousy...
If we understand the reason for it, does that mean we blame the precursors rather than hold the person accountable for their actions?

Definitly, that's the only way we can really get things better. We have to understand our deeply complex and faulty evolution. That does not mean that people who cannot be trusted in society should not be kept away from it.

[OldGit]

In this country we are always hearing of fresh murders committed by convicted killers who have been released from prison because they 'are no longer a risk'.  That's one reason why the majority of the public are in favour of bringing back capital punishment.

[Asmodean]

I read a report that the judge found that he was not insane.

Well, the report was wrong - it was a team of psychiatrists who found him clinically insane due to paranoid schizophrenia, not the judge.

He [EDIT: Breivik, not the judge. For clarification...] is likely to contest the verdict though.

[Guardian85]

The argument is that his paranoid delusions are changing his perception of reality. In the way his mind interprets the input he recieves, there is a fundamental flaw that causes him to see the world in a different, usually more scary way from ordinary people. The argument therefor is that the only way to combat this effectivly is to incarcerate him in a mental institution, where he is kept away from the public and can be treated for his mental disorder.
This can also be a good thing, from the point of view of putting him away for longer. A mental incarceration is the only way a criminal can be locked away for life in Norway. Assuming that treatment isn't effective. If it is, he can still face further procecution once he's deemed fit to stand trial.

Norway has a history of treating the criminally insane in this manner dating back to the european middle ages.