Mind over Matter

Mind over Matter

By

Robert Fields

PSY/270

I think that the difference between insanity and mental illness is that with insanity the individual does not know right from wrong. They don’t realize their consequences or even understand if the consequence is wrong. Individuals who have mental illnesses still have an understanding of reality. They understand right from wrong, they may have a different perspective of how they view what they have done, at the same time individuals with a mental illness in most cases know that they have a mental or aware something is wrong, but an individual who is insane does not always understand that there is a problem with their thinking.

The right-wrong test or the McNaughten rule cannot be used to defend a person who drank alcohol and killed someone after impairing themselves. When an individual decides to consume alcohol they do it by making that choice, so in my opinion when that individual takes that first drink up until that last drink they know the reality of what the consequences could come about.

Rational and guilty is when an individual fully understood the gravity of what was done and knew it was against the norm admitting the guilt.

Guilty but insane is when an individual is insane but is said to know right from wrong in the situation and circumstance so they are guilty.

Not guilty by reason of insanity means that an individual cannot be guilty due to the fact that they do not have the since of what’s right or what’s wrong.

After reading the ‘Matter over Mind’ case and thinking about it, in my opinion Eric Michael Clark is guilty because he was aware that he was in a shootout with a police officer and knew what the consequences were going to be if he survived the ordeal. I would be more understanding if Eric’s parents had beforehand put Eric under doctor’s care and had been diagnosed with this mental disorder and was taking medication for it. Unfortunately he wasn’t, as we all are...