It's interesting how humans view each other. Unable to bridge the distance of separate consciousness, each person assumes that normal humans essentially share basically similar brains.
Even with the mounting evidence that brains are not created equal, that each configuration varies slightly from each other with results demonstrating this truth, nevertheless, deviancy is looked upon with disdain because 'I don't understand them, they know better!'.
Again I ask the question.
Why would anyone decide on a course of action that produces less than beneficial consequences if they knew the action would result in less than beneficial consequences?
The response I usually receive for that question is, "Of course, they knew better but they thought they could get away with it."
They thought they could escape the consequences their gamble might produce. If then the difference is one of miscalculated odds, then I ask once again, did they indeed know better?
Are we overlooking that a skilful odds calculator requires a foresightful intelligence?
If one is deficient in foresight intelligence, does it not follow that they don't know better?