These terms aren't hyperbole at all. Mangione is a psychopath.
Being wrong about the effects of (and rationale for) a crime is a symptom of criminal insanity.
For example, you think that the crime that you facilitate is "justice" for perceived wrongs but in reality it is only the execution of an innocent man with a family. Such a delusion is the definition of criminal psychosis.
>All it takes is valuing other things above the life taken.
Very seriously, see a skilled therapist. Tell them what you wrote. Hope that they are able to begin to help you.
Arguing that Mangione is _criminally insane_ is arguing that he shouldn't be legally punished, that a mental disease prevented him from having the necessary mens rea to actually have his act be criminal. Are you sure that's what you want to argue? (Confinement while he remains criminally insane is certainly justified, of course.)
> For example, you think that the crime that you facilitate is "justice" for perceived wrongs but in reality it is only the execution of an innocent man with a family. Such a delusion is the definition of criminal psychosis.
"justice" and "innocent" are not facts about the world but societal judgements. Having different opinions about these is moral disagreement, not insanity, nor delusion. Expecting society to agree with you and maintaining that expectation even against evidence afterward would be delusion. Sometimes societies don't have fixed judgements. Is an abortion a medical treatment or an execution of an innocent child? Although I agree with one stance, and disagree with the other, neither is a delusion. It's a moral disagreement that remains one whether I live under laws that treat it one way, or the other.
> Very seriously, see a skilled therapist. Tell them what you wrote. Hope that they are able to begin to help you.
Don't be a dick.
Accurately describing other's morals is no reason to see a therapist. It says nothing about my morals or my sanity that I recognize a large fraction of fairly normal people do value lots of things above others' lives. Conformity and fitting in often enough, as witnessed by Hannah Aredt's phrase "the banality of evil". To the best of my knowledge I haven't contributed to excess deaths beyond the externalities of living in a first-world country, participating in its market economy, and the actions its government takes funded by the taxes I pay. I do actually value lives, so I am unlikely to attempt to take them except under extreme circumstances (and I most likely would not have the instincts to do so effectively; never been tested, and hope to never be).
Societies in general certainly don't treat lives as infinitely valuable, nor even equally valuable. They regularly make economic tradeoffs (and incoherent ones at that) that it's okay to take actions that increase the death toll as long as enough money is made from it. Society is happy to use and endorse violence -- so long as it's done by the right people to the wrong people.
Being wrong about the effects of (and rationale for) a crime is a symptom of criminal insanity.
For example, you think that the crime that you facilitate is "justice" for perceived wrongs but in reality it is only the execution of an innocent man with a family. Such a delusion is the definition of criminal psychosis.
>All it takes is valuing other things above the life taken.
Very seriously, see a skilled therapist. Tell them what you wrote. Hope that they are able to begin to help you.