Sep 28th 2011, 4:44:04
No, of course not. Only that because someone has been taught how to buy a powerball ticket doesn't automatically mean that they will.
This is where I have a great respect for folks in the judicial system. You are probably correct that the probability of an emotional response in lieu of an objective response is 50/50 for the most part with some variation depending on mental capacity and training - but in the legal field, they have to suppress that initial response and use practical and objective pre-prescribed methodologies to obtain justice. Does it happen every single time? Of course not. No system is flawless, or immune from human error. But then again, as you said the same holds true in mathematics.
Take OJ, for example. Throughout the trial, the public sentiment was to hang him from his toes from the highest scaffold until he bled from his ears. Testimony was emotionally charged, racial lines were crossed, and the media tossed accusations around like a football at a tailgate party.
Even with all this though, the prosecution and defense maintained a high level of professionalism, and worked within the system to obtain a legitimate verdict - even if it wasn't the one that the public wanted to see, or even the one that many folks considered to be the "right" verdict. The point is, despite strong emotion from the public and media, the system remained objective, and handed out the only legitimate verdict it was able to given the evidence presented in the case.
This is where I have a great respect for folks in the judicial system. You are probably correct that the probability of an emotional response in lieu of an objective response is 50/50 for the most part with some variation depending on mental capacity and training - but in the legal field, they have to suppress that initial response and use practical and objective pre-prescribed methodologies to obtain justice. Does it happen every single time? Of course not. No system is flawless, or immune from human error. But then again, as you said the same holds true in mathematics.
Take OJ, for example. Throughout the trial, the public sentiment was to hang him from his toes from the highest scaffold until he bled from his ears. Testimony was emotionally charged, racial lines were crossed, and the media tossed accusations around like a football at a tailgate party.
Even with all this though, the prosecution and defense maintained a high level of professionalism, and worked within the system to obtain a legitimate verdict - even if it wasn't the one that the public wanted to see, or even the one that many folks considered to be the "right" verdict. The point is, despite strong emotion from the public and media, the system remained objective, and handed out the only legitimate verdict it was able to given the evidence presented in the case.
