We have already worked in a different place with the question of whether humans have free will. The result was that, regardless of how the "free will" means that man in any case under very specific conditions of each case - that his life story, his Experience, which he classified as important decision criteria, his present mood, etc. - can decide on only one way. Rewind back to the time 100 times and lets the people make the decision again, he will get the same result every time. The question that arises then is: What do we actually punish the criminals? We have charged them each time that is before (legal category of personal " debt") that they have consciously decided against the law and the injustice and committed the crime. Should we rethink about the whole criminal law? Imagine a courtroom and the following dialogue between Defender and prosecutor before:
Attorney : According to the results of the investigation it is clear that you have stolen the Mona Lisa! Behind bars with you!
defender :
Not so hasty! My client has indeed confessed his crime. I still apply for acquittal! What do you wonder why at first glance, when you look closely and think about absolutely sincere and keen. For you see, my client was at the moment so not do otherwise, as the "Mona Lisa" to steal. As there is a "free", not hanging in the air will have, was the decision of my clients is an unavoidable product of numerous factors, the different can not be, but all are of equal weight for his decision! The specific electrical currents in his brain at the moment of decision for the theft were the result of his difficult childhood, his desperate financial situation, but even the mere fact of his birth, the birth of his mother and grandmother and millions of other small or large causes. Ultimately, his theft have necessarily caused the Renaissance, the extinction of the dinosaurs and the big bang. All of these events and circumstances linked an uninterrupted chain of causes that has tragically ended up in the slump in the Louvre. But he was nothing for it! The electrical impulses in his brain, although the last link in the chain of causes, but it is a random element picked out by another million. Punish but his mother that she was born, or Leonardo da Vinci, he painted the first picture! The fact that you, Judge, not now stand in its place, you owe only the happy coincidence that this endless chain of causation has not brought you to the crooks in the gutter, but on the tribunal. Do you want to punish my client really just for being in the lottery of the blind causality happens to be unlucky?
Attorney :
But Mr. defenders hesitate, but the time the consequences! First, there is no compelling If the conclusion from being . That man is not free in its decisions, may be a scientific fact. However, the consequences for our sense of justice, our value system, by which happen to be punishment of offenders, once nothing. In our society we have namely the subjective and inter-subjective idea that man is acting as autonomous beings ultimate author of his deeds, and not the extinction of the dinosaurs. This social consensus is like a menu in a restaurant: if there a free and a paid dining there, and the fee-based option, you can not tell the waiter, the cashier, too, you had it is compulsively decided and therefore not want to pay. So happens to be the rules of the game, Mr. defender. And secondly, keep in mind - if we can not punish someone for his guilt, we can also praise anyone for his services! The result of your view would accept a callous world of humanoid machines where you deny the existence of people, and their actions is as good or bad weather would have. Our identity as a human being is at stake here! Shakespeare and Beethoven were just machines? And guess what, your "knowledge" would talk about - the loss would be the result of any responsibility, and each could with the words "I could not help" save the impunity.
defender :
I ask not of outright sanctions freedom for the accused - I argue for a paradigm shift in criminal law. You, Mr. Attorney complain, not even an apple falling from a tree on your head - you are either wary of first place, or take any appropriate measures to ensure that nothing like this was repeated. And we must also deal with people - prevention above all else - or improvement of the offender. Only with the nonsense about "guilt" and "punishment" we should stop. There is increasing evidence so That even serious crime often has a clear biological catalysts - such as genetic defects or serotonin deficiency. We should start as well. And - yes, our mission should be reconsidered as a man - but it's just the lobes, for the children's education and artistic achievements nor acceptable to play your "party game" with the acceptance of personal responsibility, the fun does but at least then, if you a man for years of his life behind bars, lock and pretend that the problem was solved!
The age-old illusion is over, Mr. Prosecutor.
