On 12-31-97 Clarence Hogan wrote to John Boone... 
 CH>  JB> proposition #1:  all humans are either good or bad  
 CH>  JB> proposition #2:  a human is not good  
 CH>  JB> conclusion    :  a human is bad or evil    
 If I understand Aristotle: 
 All humand are either good or bad. 
 A good human is rational, and exercises the rational faculty 
to learn from experience, and thereby does good. 
 A bad human is not rational, cannot exercise rational faculties, 
does not learn by experience, and continues to do bad. 
 
 None will deny that some are certifyably demented, from low IQ, 
physical injury, and/or genetic abnormality.  We now find further, 
that some are affected by cerebral cortex chemical imbalances that 
maybe due to sensitivity to the coctail of synthetic chemicals in 
the modern human environment, contagious disease (i.e. syphilis), 
genetic abnormalities (like brain cancer), or traumatic results of 
abuse in childhood. No one holds that a person in such condition 
is *evil*. 
 Now find me someone who is regarded as *evil* that you can prove 
does not suffer from any of the above conditions.  Given the limit 
of diagnostic technique, no such proof is possible. 
 
 Look at the records of the most depraved social predators; what I 
see is uniform drug addiction which began at puberty.  Don't drugs 
impair rational development? Do we not try to keep them away from 
*children* because they are not *responsible*?  So, after he has 
been addicted for 7 years, and kills someone, now he is rational? 
And if he is not rational, he is still *evil*?  Scuze me? 
 
 Do I plead for mercy for such as these? You bet. shoot them and 
put them out of a miserable life.  We do not need them making any 
more misery for any other family. 
___ 
 * OFFLINE 1.58 
--- Maximus 3.01
---------------