Latest
“It Stars C. Thomas Howell. No.” Why AI Gets Stuck in a LoopShould You Query or Self-Publish Your Memoir If You’re Not Famous?Judge the Writing, Not the Tool: What the AI Pile-Ons Get WrongThiago Ferreira: Thinkers, Not DoersYana Semova: Let AI Do the AdminLisa Hamilton-Smith: Unstoppable, AI AssistedSuperman Day: The $130 Contract Behind the CapeF. Scott Fitzgerald Day: The Masterpiece That FloppedRaymond Chandler Day: The Novelist Who Started at FiftyJohn Steinbeck Day: The Reporter Who Wrote the NovelInternational Translation Day: The Invisible AuthorsMaya Angelou Day: The Dare That Became a MemoirNational Podcast Day: The Interview Is the Raw MaterialKurt Vonnegut Day: The Book That Took Twenty YearsTell a Fairy Tale Day: The Stories Everybody EditedHarry Potter’s Birthday: The Book Twelve Publishers MissedHarper Lee Day: The Draft Her Editor Saw ThroughGene Roddenberry Day: The Pilot Who Pitched the StarsRoald Dahl Day: Six Pencils and a Grudge Against Grown-UpsInternational Literacy Day: The Readers Books LoseJack Kerouac Day: The Scroll and the Last AddressIan Fleming Day: Two Thousand Words a MorningStephen King Day: The Daily Two ThousandZora Neale Hurston Day: The Ear She TrainedFyodor Dostoevsky Day: The Novels Written Against the ClockEmily Dickinson Day: The Poems in the DrawerRobert E. Howard Day: The Texan Who Built ConanAlice’s Day: The Story Told on a Rowing BoatNational Library Lovers Month: The Building a Town Pays ForBack to the Future Day: The Script Where Everything Pays OffEncourage a Young Writer Day: The Adult Who Read the PagesElmore Leonard Day: Leave Out the Part Readers SkipElmore Leonard’s 10 Rules of Writing, and Which Ones I BreakShould Your Novel Have a Prologue? When a Cold Open Earns Its Place“People Who Use AI Deserve to Be Castrated”: When the Sentence Outruns the CrimeHow Famous Memoirs Were Really Written: What the Collaborators DidFlorida RoadkillThe Bell JarBeneath a Scarlet SkyOpen: An AutobiographyCampus BattlefieldLifeThe Phone Book: The Curious History of the Book That Everyone Uses But No One ReadsIt Doesn’t Take a HeroThe MAGA DoctrineThe Sage of SagittariusDid I Ever Tell You This?: A MemoirPa’anAmerican SoldierMake Your Bed: Little Things That Can Change Your Life…And Maybe the World

Can You Find Reason in Insanity?

TL;DR: After every atrocity, people hunt for the reason a mass shooter or bomber did it. This essay argues the hunt is a category error: insane acts don’t have reasons a rational mind can use, and treating them as if they do gives the act more sense than it ever had.

I find it amusing, in an ironic and sad kind of way, when people try and figure out why an insane person did something. It’s insanity!

Shooting a whole bunch of school children is the act of an insane person. You can come up with all the reasons you want, but the simple fact is the act wasn’t rational, it wasn’t sane.

It’s offensive, too. Every time it happens, the newspapers and the experts line up to study the killer like a riddle, digging through his childhood for the key that will make it all make sense, while the children he murdered fade into the background of his story. I think that’s backwards, and it disgusts me.

For all we know, he thought space aliens were invading and he was doing his duty to protect us. Who knows? Who cares? It wasn’t something a rational, sane person would do, and no amount of digging through his life is going to turn it into one. Blowing up a building in Oklahoma City with a rented truck full of fertilizer, something nobody does by accident, is the act of an insane person. Whatever his reasons were, they weren’t the reasons of a rational being, and I refuse to dignify them by pretending otherwise.

What sane people do

Rational, sane beings can sit down and talk with one another. Sane people understand there are lots of options. Talk. Move. Run. Hide. Eat. Bribe. Protest. Picket. Whatever. There are many, many options to work out one’s problems.

If the home life of the kid who shot the children was so bad, he could have run off and joined the circus, or hitchhiked to another state, or some such thing. Instead, he chose to deliberately shoot children in a school.

The search for reasons

And now the newspapers are hunting for a reason, some rational cause. He didn’t like his mother, his mother was going to put him in an asylum, he didn’t like the flavor of his cookies, whatever. None of those are why he did it. He was insane. It’s that simple. Every motive a reporter serves up makes the act sound somehow “okay,” as if he had a reason, after all, however weird. Nope. He wasn’t sane. Period. Grown adults who pretend otherwise should know better.

Our legal system spends countless hours and millions, even billions, of dollars trying to prove whether someone who committed murder was sane or insane.

He murdered another human being (assuming it wasn’t an accident or self-defense). Premeditated murder isn’t the act of a sane being. Stop trying to find an excuse or a reason. Just stop it. All that money buys is a longer look at the killer.

There’s no excuse. There’s no reason. There’s no rationality to the act.

Blowing up a building in Iraq with a car bomb isn’t sane. Blowing up a building in Oklahoma isn’t rational. Shooting school kids isn’t rational. Putting on a vest with explosives and walking into a crowded mall isn’t something a sane person does.

I don’t want to know his reasons. I’ve read enough of these tidy explanations after enough of these tragedies to know they never explain anything, and I’m sick of the ritual. I’m done treating the killer like a puzzle worth solving. What he did was madness with a body count, and whatever attention I have left goes to the people he hurt.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is hunting for a shooter’s motive a mistake?
Because the act wasn’t rational, and treating it as if it followed reasons a sane mind can use gives it more sense than it ever had. You can invent explanations all day; the act remains insane.
Are you saying we should not investigate these crimes?
No. Investigate, prosecute, prevent. The objection is to the public ritual of demanding a coherent why from an incoherent act, as if the right explanation would make it make sense.
What should we do instead?
Accept that some acts have no usable reasons, stop amplifying the perpetrators, and put the energy into the rational things: prevention, care, and the people harmed.

0 comments

No comments yet. Yours can be the first.

Was this useful?

Leave a comment