Document Type:Essay

Subject Area:Philosophy

Document 1

Some of the most common and detrimental mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective, bipolar and major depression end up causing detrimental disabilities and often become chronic. Initially, mental disorders had increasingly not been thought of as worthy of the concerns of physicians. Therefore, the symptoms of the illness were defined in a different manner by a wide variety of scholars notwithstanding that it's inherently a medical problem. Natural and supernatural forces have remarkably been attributed as the causative agents of these disorders. Anthropological work within the non-western cultures points out a number of behaviors that signify a mental disorder but not experienced within their culture hence not considered as mental illnesses (Marsella, Anthony and White 9). Also, the only way of coming up with a meaningful conclusion would be considering individuals in the category of psychopathology.

Sign up to view the full document!

Notably, this involves making inquiries as to whether the person suffering from schizophrenia, compulsive disorder and autism, which substantially affect one’s free will. Consequently, this approach on the upper hand determines whether the person could or is not responsible for their actions. Going against this line of thought, we can be justified to argue that there is no direct link between an individual having mental illness and attesting to subsequent responsibility. In fact, the question at stake should not be the procurement of the mental disorder but the functioning of symptoms in particular circumstances. Notably, hyped depression may not attenuate responsibility, but actively affects an individual's desires resulting in loss of interest in performing daily activities. Therefore, mental illness may always affect response to a limited extent by either influencing an individual's choices or a personal control over potential outcomes.

Sign up to view the full document!

Moreover, these kinds of factors can be significant to an extent without implying blame, which is also similar to an individual's immediate environment, genes, cultures, and mood. For instance, different emotions may act as a hindrance to self-control and adults who find themselves gravely punishing a child because of rage stand to be blamed for their actions. The majority of policymakers and philosophers hold that the period of time psychopathology tends to affect an individual's capacities to sufficient levels might lighten one’s responsibility. Others might argue that mental disorders cause some sort of irresistible instinct that could result in appropriate control over a person's conduct. A plausible defense for an individual's seeming lack of responsibility for their actions gets to be the inevitability of medical conditions. Under this guise, individuals are never responsible for their behavior due to mental disorder because eventually an individual will not be held responsible for possessing the disorder itself.

Sign up to view the full document!

In fact, one should be held accountable for their actions if it is proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the individual was responsible for the activities leading to the disorder (Shaw 148). As such, not a single person should be held accountable for the root of their actions if its source has a long history and is entangled in an endless web of actions dating many years ago. Mental disorders have different kinds of symptoms and each varies in accordance with the severity. These affect the extent to which they influence actions and lure individuals into incoherent actions which can hardly be traced back to a diagnosed mental illness. Mental disorders are in some cases justifiable courses of action as longs as the manifest symptoms underline several features of the agent resulting in the activity in consideration (McMillan 233).

Sign up to view the full document!

In retrospect, the specific issue and its features are necessary for resolving the extent to which a specific actor is responsible for their actions. These involve matters surrounding choice, control, or coherence of actions, further compounding the issues related to theories of responsibility. In summary, despite the earlier claims on people suffering from a mental disorder, the picture painted in the aforementioned reasons for action and responsibility calls us to treat them as autonomous individuals whose decisions on how to live and act should be respected. It is through the act of being reasonable that possibilities of praise and tendencies of passive attitudes against a certain condition can be improvements. The paper has also pointed out ways in which the affected individuals might live within the same spectrum with people who are neurotypical.

Sign up to view the full document!

Moreover, the individuals who are neurotypical might be hungry, exhausted, hungry and prone to distractions and fear which should be adequately weighed when considering the level of responsibility for their actions. Works Cited Angermeyer, Matthias C. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. McMillan, J. R. Dangerousness, mental disorder, and responsibility.  Journal of medical ethics 29.

Sign up to view the full document!

From $10 to earn access

Only on Studyloop

Original template