Governor Rick Perry, in a recent presidential debate, was asked a question about how his state, Texas, has executed 234 death row inmates - and this statement led to applause from the crowd - before Perry even answered the question.
Meanwhile, I just finished the book Incognito by David Eagleman, which, according to its cover, is a national bestseller, whatever that means, and is a book about neuroscience and consciousness. A lot of it is the typical, "wow isn't this cool" and brain injury stuff you normally get from neuroscience books, but the second half delves into the more interesting conclusions that neuroscience leads to - either a deterministic or probabilistic worldview that leaves no room for some alternate entity with "free will" not grounded in the physical brain. And of course, this has huge ramifications for a legal system that assumes culpability is a measure of blameworthyness, and that choice is key in this matter (this is shown in that we do not punish scizophrenics or sleepwalkers for crimes as harshly or at all). He argues, that our legal system should therefore be not designed to punish, but to reprogram the brains of offenders to have better impulse control (which typically very poor in criminals) or otherwise fix the problem.
Of course, all the evidence he uses to reach this point is quite long and drawn out, and I won't get into it here. And there's also the whole issue of people being forced to be reprogrammed. But even if we just assume he is right, do you think that the American population will ever be able to give up their precious assumption of free will? And, based on the very interesting reaction of the crowd at the debate, will we ever want to part with a punitive legal system, of which execution is the most severe form?
I would say no, at least not for a long time.
No comments:
Post a Comment