The Interview and Neuroscience - Assignment Example

The Interview and Neuroscience the New Philosophy Introduction Douglas Starr’s article, The Interview acquaints knowledge to the reader of the practices used by a famous detective, John Reid in interrogating criminal suspects. During the process of interrogation, Mr. Parker confesses to have killed his wife due to marital problems. Contextually, Parker visited home from work only to find his wife murdered. Arguably, the aspect of murder in this case serves to decipher knowledge on the forensic practices engaged by John Reid in manipulating the mindset of his victims to conform to his interviews, and agree on having executed a person or people unjustly (Starr 33). Neuroscience, the New Philosophy article engages readers into ascertaining that some people may be convicted of crimes that they neither did not know nor are they knowledgeable of the people who undertook them. The following study evaluates and establishes the similarities between the two articles on neuroscience and its flaws as depicted in John Reid’s interrogation practices. Similarities between The Interview and Neuroscience-the New Philosophy articles John Reid exposed Parker to a series of questions concerning his wife’s murder case. During the interview, Reid focused on ensuring that Parker conformed to his demands that he was indeed behind his wife’s execution. The study indicates that Parker was honest to explain how he found his wife lying dead on the bed as he went home from his workplace. According to Ramachandran, “the society abides to the Freudian theory while addressing psychiatry issues and in major cases, people base their arguments on unrealistic judgment”. Through Reid’s determination and confidence that he would eventually incriminate Parker towards his wife’s murder, the controversial article on neuroscience asserts on the societal changes and technological improvements that people use to argue upon the occurrence of something as true while reducing the use of manual judgments. The two articles indicate similarities concerning the function of the human brain, and the assumptions of the society concerning the actions of transmitters and reactors in the brain (39). A sensory machine attached to the suspect indicated that he was giving factual answers concerning his wife’s murder. Despite the honesty, Reid revealed dissatisfaction to the answers and warned Parker that he was lying against telling the truth. According to the Neuroscience, the New Philosophy article, the human mind is vulnerable to temptations and people are capable of agreeing to certain demands whenever they are incapable of finding actual answers concerning the situations in question (34). This similarity is incremental to that identified in the article whereby Parker submits to John Reid’s demands that he killed his wife. Parker tolerated John Reid’s questioning concerning his wife’s murder with the perception that the commission’s central goal is acquire the best information that would enable the jury to bring to board the exact people who killed his wife. Neuroscience centers its obligations in the identification of mental processes that eventually serve the interviewers to evaluate the occurrence of the events in questions with improved ease. Starr indicated that Parker was exposed to many questions whereby the detective intensified his questioning purposely to incriminate him (37). He asserted that, “Reid had developed the essential reputation as the only person who could get criminals to confess”. Reid uses machines while interviewing Parker and he exploits all his questions without noting any changes that may lead to the conviction of the subject since it will be evident that he undertook the prescribed criminal act. Further, the two articles deliver knowledge that human beings are likely to show signs related to mental illnesses whenever exposed to situations that frustrate their mental capabilities. For instance, Parker is mentally frustrated following the death of his wife. Despite the transmitters and reactors depicting Parker’s mental processes, the detective engages him to challenging questions, and neuroscience ascertains that such questions always frustrate the individual capacity of thinking and responding to external and internal stimuli. Parker conforms to the demands of the detective hence he faces a lawsuit concerning the murder case of his wife (39). Through the evaluation of the process, it seems that Parker lost focus and was unknowledgeable of the answers he was giving the detective. Arguably, the “Neuroscience, the New Philosophy” article indicates that people are vulnerable to painful situations hence they are exposed to thinking about executing certain actions as salient resolutions to solve the frustrating issues if at all they would occur during their lifetimes. Starr’s article indicates that after Parker declined of having killed his wife, Reid questioned him of the marital tussles that had been in prevalence between the couple while clarifying on the issue as attributive to the murder (39). Such an argument conforms to neuroscience whereby people are capable of contemplating on the meaning of certain statements and adapt instant solutions to solve them. Holding to the fact that Reid suggested to Parker of having killed his wife, it is of essence to understand that the suspect bore limited capabilities to make sound judgment and vindicate himself from John Reid’s plot. John Reid’s art of interrogation is biased since he uses the identified psychological techniques of judging people’s mental abilities of to contradict Parker’s judgment and win the interview by ensuring that the suspect agrees to having undertaken the offence. Parker is unaware of the detective’s treacherous plan thus; he answers questions while thinking of exactly what could have transpired during his wife’s murder. The thoughts expose Parker to a different situation of thinking of the loss and the life he spent with his late wife. On the other hand, Reid exposes Parker to the intensity of the situation through his inquiries concerning Parker’s arrival at home, the exact situation, his call for help, and his level of honesty to justify that he was not the murderer. Therefore, Parker answers the questions while drowning into a process of imagination on what he witnessed on the fateful day that he lost his wife. It is during this point of the interview that Reid argues out with Parker of having solely committed the inhuman act (40). While Parker is mentally unprepared of the turn of events and change of story, Reid narrates to Parker with utmost confidence that the two couples had been for a lengthened period differed on several issues concerning their marriage. According to the article on neuroscience, the author depicts that people are likely to imagine the occurrence of events while exposed to intense frustrations. Psychiatrists indicate that human beings may create an imagination however force, and design a mindset of the actions that he or she would take in case the events in their lives. In reference to the interrogation process, it is evident that Reid used Parker’s explanations to craft the situation and emphasize on other imaginary, but common issues in marriages that could lead to broken relationships of every couple in the society. Further, Reid suggests to Parker on the several actions that he might have practiced in the event of such occurrences. Due to the process of the frustrating interview with Reid, Parker realizes that he had marital problems with his wife. However, the fact that he loved his wife ensues to a jealous state since he cannot bear to see any form premarital relationships prevailing between his wife and other men (40). Conclusion Parker reacts to the thoughts and makes judgments from Reid’s suggestions that he shot her for engaging in those practices. Therefore, Parker agrees of having executed his wife despite his previous arguments that he had found her dead at home (41). The two articles indicate the relationship between mental perceptions and oral conversations, and the extent at which people may make unsound judgments due to frustrations. In conclusion, Neuroscience, the New Philosophy, and The Interview serve as realistic indicators on the issue of transmitters and reactors in judging of events. Work cited Starr, Douglas. The Interview: Do Police Interrogation Techniques Produce False Confessions? Department of Criminal Justice. The New Yorker, 2013. Print. Read More