ACT在线读练习题2.docVIP

Passage II SOCIAL SCIENCE: This passage is adapted from the chapter “Personality Disorders” in Introduction to Psychology, edited by Rita L. Atkinson and Richard C. Atkinson (?1981 by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.). How should the law treat a mentally disturbedperson who commits a criminal offense? Should indi-viduals whose mental faculties are impaired be heldresponsible for their actions? These questions are of5concern to social scientists, to members of the legalprofession, and to individuals who work with criminaloffenders. Over the centuries, an important part of Westernlaw has been the concept that a civilized society should10not punish a person who is mentally incapable of con-trolling his or her conduct. In 1724, an English courtmaintained that a man was not responsible for an act if“he doth not know what he is doing, no more than . . . awild beast.” Modern standards of legal responsibility,15however, have been based on the McNaghten decisionof 1843. McNaghten, a Scotsman, suffered the paranoiddelusion that he was being persecuted by the Englishprime minister, Sir Robert Peel. In an attempt to killPeel, he mistakenly shot Peel’s secretary. Everyone20involved in the trial was convinced by McNaghten’ssenseless ramblings that he was insane. He was judgednot responsible by reason of insanity and sent to amental hospital, where he remained until his death. ButQueen Victoria was not pleased with the verdict—25apparently she felt that political assassinations shouldnot be taken lightly—and called on the House of Lordsto review the decision. The decision was upheld andrules for the legal definition of insanity were put intowriting. The McNaghten Rule states that a defendant30may be found “not guilty by reason of insanity” only ifhe were so severely disturbed at the time of his act thathe did not know what he was doing, or that if he didknow what he was doing, he did not know it waswrong. 35The McNaghten Rule was adopted in the Unite