Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- help_out [2024/07/13 04:46] – 141.0.12.100
+++ help_out [2025/06/24 08:25] (current) – created 178.230.110.228
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-HEALTH - fu = life-ism :(
+does a schizophrenic perceive more risks and risk of failure or does he miss those and act blindly?
-Infectious diseases
+GPT-4o mini
-o malaria $ (1)
+Individuals with schizophrenia can experience a range of symptoms that may affect their perception of risks and decision-making. The impact of schizophrenia on risk perception can vary widely among individuals, but here are some general points to consider:
-help malaria https://www.globalgiving.org/search/?size=25&nextPage=1&sortField=sortorder&keywords=malaria&loadAllResults=true
+Altered Perception: Schizophrenia can lead to altered perceptions of reality, which may affect how individuals assess risks. For some, delusions or hallucinations may distort their understanding of situations, leading them to underestimate or overestimate risks.
-o aids $ (2)
+Cognitive Impairments: Many individuals with schizophrenia experience cognitive impairments, which can affect executive functioning, attention, and judgment. This may result in difficulties in evaluating risks accurately or making informed decisions.
-help hiv https://www.globalgiving.org/search/?size=25&nextPage=1&sortField=sortorder&keywords=hiv&loadAllResults=true
+Emotional Factors: Emotional dysregulation is common in schizophrenia, which can influence risk perception. **Anxiety or paranoia may lead some individuals to perceive higher risks, while others may feel a sense of detachment that causes them to act without considering potential consequences.**
-Outbreaks
+Behavioral Responses: Some individuals **may engage in risky behaviors due to impulsivity or a lack of awareness of potential dangers, while others may become overly cautious due to heightened anxiety about failure or negative outcomes.**
-Chronic illnesses
-o hart & vaat
-o diabetic
-Mental health disorders
-o autism
-o depression
-Lack of sanitation $ (3)
-help sanitation https://www.globalgiving.org/search/?size=25&nextPage=1&sortField=sortorder&keywords=sanitation&loadAllResults=true
-Antibiotic resistance $ (4)
-o already 2005 ls
-o Nanospunge, Gels
 ===
-PLANET & LIFE focus 1995 & 2006+
+So
-. Climate
+o act regardless, risky
-. Deforestation $ (5)
+o perceive more threat, failure
-help trees https://treesforall.nl/
+O but never illusion responsibility
-o truth about compensation?
+That's the delusion in normals
-. Land degradation
+The slaves in society
-. pollution
+===
-o sustain & resources
-o plastic in ocean etc 2013+
-. air pollution
+if evaluation of outcome and risk involves moral frameworks that differ among groups in society, how can evaluation be right?
-o coal
-o lack of wilderness
-. water pollution
+GPT-4o mini
-.
-.
-. water scarcity
+The evaluation of outcomes and risks within different moral frameworks can indeed lead to varying conclusions about what is considered "right" or "wrong." Here are some key points to consider regarding this complexity:
-o impact of climate on water & crops
-= +
+Subjectivity of Morality: Moral frameworks are often shaped by cultural, social, and individual factors. What one group considers ethical may be viewed differently by another. This subjectivity means that evaluations of outcomes and risks **can differ widely**.
-Loss of biodiversity $ (6)
+Contextual Factors: The context in which decisions are made plays a crucial role. Factors such as historical background, societal norms, and specific circumstances can influence how risks and outcomes are evaluated. This context can lead to **different moral judgments**.
-help wnf org https://wwf.org/
+Utilitarian vs. Deontological Approaches: Different ethical theories, such as utilitarianism (which focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number) and deontological ethics (which emphasizes duties and rules), can lead to different evaluations of the same situation. This divergence highlights the complexity of moral reasoning.
-Illegal wild life trade $ (7)
-Overfishing
-===
-CIVILIZATION focus 22 ended
+Dialogue and Discourse: Engaging in open dialogue and discourse among different groups can help bridge gaps in understanding. By discussing differing moral frameworks, individuals can gain insights into alternative perspectives, which may lead to more informed and balanced evaluations.
-. War
+Ethical Pluralism: Recognizing that multiple moral frameworks can coexist is essential. Ethical pluralism acknowledges that there may **not be a single "right"** answer but rather a spectrum of **valid** perspectives. This approach encourages respect for diversity in moral reasoning.
-o VOOR rusland
-. economic instability
+So: valid as aso drivers
-. Political instability
+So: invalid as shaman, witch
-o nl, uk, usa
-. disasters $ (8) celtic divine -1
+Consensus Building: In many cases, societies strive to build consensus around certain ethical principles, such as human rights or **justice**. While complete agreement may be impossible, finding common ground can help guide evaluations of risks and outcomes in a way that is more broadly accepted.
-=== eof, except INFO PUPIL
+Hr vs justice against shaman
-LIST EXPELLED - Penny, ZH
-Mr [[Anderson]]
+Ty
+That's it for 'society', 'sz'