Thesis Abstract and Dissertation Abstracts

Inobservabilities within Dutch legal frameworks could initially be sought in terms directing to mental states i.e. intentions, f.i. in relation to murder. Proof of the inner state of mind should be derived from proved behaviour, although scientific-methodological demands to proof require independent indication to intent and behaviour.Friedrich Nietzsche touched the problem of inobservability by pointing to the problem of succession of facts in relation to the ex post facto moment of consideration, the latter causing a reversed direction in mental movement, starting with the consequence, the punishable act, and deriving from it the intent by lack of direct observable indicators to the initial entity. The problem could be discovered within justitial-psychiatric research to states of mind of possible or proved delinquents. A suspect could not be inspected on its degree of mental responsibility quality if its guilt is not proved, and a proved delinquent could not be subjected to mental research relativating its culpability. Concerning research on pure psychiatric reasons to enclosure the causal relation between disturbance and danger could not ultimately be diagnosed by lack of observability of the categories psychical disturbancies and danger, and of the causality between the two entities. If proof of existence of disturbancies good be valid, the reported behaviour could still be initiated by other than pathological causes. Even the utmost reason of enclosure of the concerned person, to be situated in the caused degree of danger, could not necessarily be connected to a high degree of observability, considering the linquistic signification of the term contenting a degree of expectation. Another inobservability could be found in Penal Code articles mentioning the subject as supposed actor only in masculine form, obscurating the woman as possible actor. 

Other articles are posting the fact as punishable without reference to a punishable actor in potentio obscurating both sexes. Either Civil Code articles deliver problems concerning observability: an in personal experience robbed person should leave its possession to fraudeur, thief, obscurator or streetrobber if no formal proof could be reached within Penal Code by police or other justitial functionaries. This circumstance being in some cases inevitable should however not urge the Civil Code text to eliminate the difference between ownership and possession, leaving te thief with much or more legality in possession of the robbed entity than the original owner could initially reach in his/her new status as demander within Civil Code. If no traces are left in the direction of a person as suspect proved missed goods accompanied with physical or material traces could instigate the police to start justitial research intially without applying personal arrests.

This Dissertation Abstract may be cited as follows:
DISSERTATION 1992  Author: Wijck van, M.M.  DEVIANCE AND RATIONALITY                                                                       The observability of concepts and the logical consistency of reasonings applied to judgment of deviant behaviour.  Original title: DEVIANTIE EN RATIONALITEIT                                               De waarneembaarheid van concepten en de logische consistentie van redeneringen die gebruikt worden bij de beoordeling van deviant gedrag 

Submission Details: Dissertation Abstract submitted by Margaretha WIJCK van from Netherlands on 24-Jul-2012 08:29.
Abstract has been viewed 3037 times (since 7 Mar 2010).

Margaretha WIJCK van Contact Details: Email: pasbaxo@gmail.com