Search:

Obviously, by the good of society, I mean technological progress which breeds science, forming a positive reinforcing cycle. Ray Dalio interprets this well in his book that describes the rise and fall of empires, or, society: education brings technology brings innovation brings financial success brings education (to paraphrase). So evidently intellectual acumen is cornerstone to the cycle and societal evolution through time.

It is a difficult moral question.

We could go on and on to and fro but it seems that personal moral baseline is the guide for the sake of our argument. Obviously, I think the examination threshold should be set so low that there can be no debate to be made on the standing of mental acuity, but even then crevices for corruption and homicide exist. It would be a dangerous path.

Frankly, I think the threshold I am referring to is so low that it would be beneficial for all parties involved, but the adoption question and the moral question stand unfulfilled.

The initial intent is progressive, but anything further is regressive and extremely dangerous.

Obviously, by the good of society, I mean technological progress which breeds science, forming a positive reinforcing cycle. Ray Dalio interprets this well in his book that describes the rise and fall of empires, or, society: education brings technology brings innovation brings financial success brings education (to paraphrase). So evidently intellectual acumen is cornerstone to the cycle and societal evolution through time.

It is a difficult moral question.

We could go on and on to and fro but it seems that personal moral baseline is the guide for the sake of our argument. Obviously, I think the examination threshold should be set so low that there can be no debate to be made on the standing of mental acuity, but even then crevices for corruption and homicide exist. It would be a dangerous path.

Frankly, I think the threshold I am referring to is so low that it would be beneficial for all parties involved, but the adoption question and the moral question stand unfulfilled.

The initial intent is progressive, but anything further is regressive and extremely dangerous.

Great.

You make two interesting points and a strawman (redirected to rankings of physical/mental values from the intrinsic value of intelligence).
1) How can we classify 'mentally ill'? I agree, the classification is on the surface, broad.
2) The moral question.

It is possible for basic mental ability and intelligence to be measured via objective reasoning exams or similar. Granted, these tests are not microscopically precise, but they do grant the examiner enough top-down insight on basic mental ability. For the purposes of our filter, we can bar the examination threshold to a relatively low passing requirement, enough that it would give us the insight to identify individuals incapable of value production. This way, the false positives are reduced to a negligible/non-existent number, in exchange for a higher number of false negatives (call it the buffer). The specifics of this examination can debated and scientifically constructed through phases of research and expert opinion (psychologists, mental health professionals, etc).

The moral question is a tougher one to answer. We are animals after all, and resources are not unlimited. In the lens of a society, a non-producing agent who is [U]incapable[/U] of creating value is a liability and an unjustifiable expense on a society's balance sheet. These agents oftentimes occupy the upper percentiles of a theoretical value consumption chart; the expense is not only unjustified, but also excessive. You can call it psychopathic, callous, whatever it may be, but the math simply does not work out. We can follow 'moral values' that blindly deny the science and can lead to societal decay, or we can objectively observe value metrics and adjust to items that lead to societal growth.

Great.

You make two interesting points and a strawman (redirected to rankings of physical/mental values from the intrinsic value of intelligence).
1) How can we classify 'mentally ill'? I agree, the classification is on the surface, broad.
2) The moral question.

It is possible for basic mental ability and intelligence to be measured via objective reasoning exams or similar. Granted, these tests are not microscopically precise, but they do grant the examiner enough top-down insight on basic mental ability. For the purposes of our filter, we can bar the examination threshold to a relatively low passing requirement, enough that it would give us the insight to identify individuals incapable of value production. This way, the false positives are reduced to a negligible/non-existent number, in exchange for a higher number of false negatives (call it the buffer). The specifics of this examination can debated and scientifically constructed through phases of research and expert opinion (psychologists, mental health professionals, etc).

The moral question is a tougher one to answer. We are animals after all, and resources are not unlimited. In the lens of a society, a non-producing agent who is incapable of creating value is a liability and an unjustifiable expense on a society's balance sheet. These agents oftentimes occupy the upper percentiles of a theoretical value consumption chart; the expense is not only unjustified, but also excessive. You can call it psychopathic, callous, whatever it may be, but the math simply does not work out. We can follow 'moral values' that blindly deny the science and can lead to societal decay, or we can objectively observe value metrics and adjust to items that lead to societal growth.

Well one can make the utilitarian argument from a positive value perspective, but one also can look at it from a negative value perspective with respect to society (eg. trimming the fat).

You can say then that this also lumps people with physical disabilities, but it is evident the mind is the greatest value producer (eg. Stephen Hawking), even greater than physical ability.

So filtering for non-value producing agents in the lens of utilitarian theory, the mentally ill are at the very top of this list. Sure, some may be able to be utilized for manual labor, but their lifetime market value is negligible in comparison to that of machines we could build to complete their potentially assigned tasks.

Moral justifications aside, the bare logic makes sense.

Well one can make the utilitarian argument from a positive value perspective, but one also can look at it from a negative value perspective with respect to society (eg. trimming the fat).

You can say then that this also lumps people with physical disabilities, but it is evident the mind is the greatest value producer (eg. Stephen Hawking), even greater than physical ability.

So filtering for non-value producing agents in the lens of utilitarian theory, the mentally ill are at the very top of this list. Sure, some may be able to be utilized for manual labor, but their lifetime market value is negligible in comparison to that of machines we could build to complete their potentially assigned tasks.

Moral justifications aside, the bare logic makes sense.

They produce minimal value to society while necessitating the upper range of an average person's resource consumption in order to keep them alive and stable.

They are a burden whose offspring will likewise be disadvantaged in society.

In the metaphor of cells, mentally ill persons are akin to cancer cells - where in the cellular microcosm they are eliminated by the body's immune system, we as a society tolerate and even at times celebrate the mentally ill.

To execute and harvest the organs of a MIP would be a net benefit to society and the individual, who is freed from suffering.

They produce minimal value to society while necessitating the upper range of an average person's resource consumption in order to keep them alive and stable.

They are a burden whose offspring will likewise be disadvantaged in society.

In the metaphor of cells, mentally ill persons are akin to cancer cells - where in the cellular microcosm they are eliminated by the body's immune system, we as a society tolerate and even at times celebrate the mentally ill.

To execute and harvest the organs of a MIP would be a net benefit to society and the individual, who is freed from suffering.

My Id: 1-s2-1-12590017

Thank :):):)

My Id: 1-s2-1-12590017

Thank

Just take the 100 USD lmao

Just take the 100 USD lmao

?????

Not part of the CIA - did not understand half of that.

Received my key via PM on an older account with lost credentials (old computer)

Insofar as this Fenixstar person and attributed similarities etc., I'm sure there are others that play the game and prefer mass murderer, marshall, serial killer, veteran , etc (good choices)

Just wrap this up as targeted moderator abuse and call it a day - no need for the antics

?????

Not part of the CIA - did not understand half of that.

Received my key via PM on an older account with lost credentials (old computer)

Insofar as this Fenixstar person and attributed similarities etc., I'm sure there are others that play the game and prefer mass murderer, marshall, serial killer, veteran , etc (good choices)

Just wrap this up as targeted moderator abuse and call it a day - no need for the antics

Just FYI this entire game was hacked by a person playing on 7+ accounts

There was never any real game to begin with / not surprised if OP and I were the only real people playing with the hacker

Just FYI this entire game was hacked by a person playing on 7+ accounts

There was never any real game to begin with / not surprised if OP and I were the only real people playing with the hacker

The informant did not produce a response to my expectation of a real vig ( eg. question why/ offer commentary in day chat)

only evil role that wants an extra day and claims vigi would be informant

I donated an amount in the sum of 100 USD to obtain my benefactor ID code

The informant did not produce a response to my expectation of a real vig ( eg. question why/ offer commentary in day chat)

only evil role that wants an extra day and claims vigi would be informant

I donated an amount in the sum of 100 USD to obtain my benefactor ID code

Appealing this. (Kujura)

No idea who Fenixstar is. Have not used and do not know of any 3rd party tools (hacks)

DH spoke first during day leading to kill /
Informant claim unreasonable given his day chat / asking for an extra night to kill

Listed and actual donation benefits -> 20K pts

Appealing this. (Kujura)

No idea who Fenixstar is. Have not used and do not know of any 3rd party tools (hacks)

DH spoke first during day leading to kill /
Informant claim unreasonable given his day chat / asking for an extra night to kill

Listed and actual donation benefits -> 20K pts