I was considering the Catch-22 situation, and really do think it is an interesting paradox: can a madman truly know that he is mad? The original postulate was one of absolutes, whereby a madman has to be absolutely ignorant of his own madness. However, it is interesting to consider the hypothetical situation whereby this is not the case.
For example, a madman may be aware of his own madness, but be unable to refrain from mad behavior. I recall with amusement the case of Fulgrim whereby he had the misfortune of realizing the madness of his ways after the death of his brother, just before the Slaaneshi daemon fully possessed him while allowing a fragment of his consciousness to gawk in horror at the daemon's actions.
A person thus afflicted cannot be reasonably held accountable for the involuntary actions of the body, yet in a world where people are largely expected to be in control of themselves, I do wonder how such a person would be judged. Guilty, I suppose.
No comments:
Post a Comment