Differences

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

--- help_out [2024/07/31 05:06] – 89.205.226.212
+++ help_out [2025/06/24 08:25] (current) – created 178.230.110.228
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Patiënten die onderling via sociale media contact houden blijken een betere relatie met hun zorgverlener te hebben. En dat het delen van je emoties een positief effect heeft, dat wisten we, maar dat dat effect ook opgaat als je je emoties deelt via sociale media, is dit jaar [2018] ook bewezen.
+does a schizophrenic perceive more risks and risk of failure or does he miss those and act blindly?
-CHECK https://m.ggztotaal.nl/#!/news/3705729
+GPT-4o mini
-===
+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:
-Mervyn houdt ook volop contact, met 4 zo mogelijk.
+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.
+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.
-Mervyn is geinteresseerd in meisjes - [[ook zonder meer]]
+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.**
-- en vrouwen welzijn: censuur, abuse & educatie
+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.**
-=
-Hij deelt hier een ontdekking inzake
-privacy van een volwassen vrouw.
-Deze ontdekking deelt hij gewoon
-via zijn nieuwste onderneming: penny
-Penny is nu qua wegwijzing gesloten.
-Er werken 10-12 pupils in deze wiki.
-En headmaster mervyn aka lijpje ook
-en hij houdt een oogje in het zeil.
-NB. Mervyn is asexueel, anti seks
-en pro masturbatie. Hij helpt hier
-zelfs het Taiwanese leger mee...
-CHECK [[unavailable]]
 ===
-Hiermee dus ook...
+So
-===
+o act regardless, risky
-Masturberen Magazine
+o perceive more threat, failure
-GESNAPT SPECIAL! Masturberen
+O but never illusion responsibility
-Magazine in LEIDSCHENDAM ... "What?"
+That's the delusion in normals
-===
+The slaves in society
-GGZ RIVIERDUINEN RUYT4 X?
-FILMT CLIENTEN IN BED! ... "Omg"
 ===
-Zondag 06.14am op 28/7 2024ad
+if evaluation of outcome and risk involves moral frameworks that differ among groups in society, how can evaluation be right?
-{{screenshot_20240728-064010.png}}
+GPT-4o mini
-===
+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:
-Vaag, maar zie Iemand in bed stappen...
+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**.
-Hier ligt ze:
+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**.
+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.
-{{screenshot_20240728-063952.png}}
+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.
-Lees the disclaimer at [[Start]] (English)
+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.
-=== Eof - Gefilmd op bed
+So: valid as aso drivers
-More
+So: invalid as shaman, witch
-De originele help out page
+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.
-Hier [[help_out2]]
+Hr vs justice against shaman
-En...
+Ty
-o [[critic_of_the_nl_regime]]
+That's it for 'society', 'sz'
-=== Eof