If behavior rises from psycho-chemistry, can there be blame?

Question

As we learn more about how the brain functions, we find out that many things people do are a direct result of chemical relationships in their head. Since this is beyond their control, can we hold people accountable for their actions?

Just because someone can not be blamed for their actions does not mean that they should not be controlled.
My question is about the effects on morality of advancing the science of psycho-chemistry, not wether or not we should modify the criminal system.

Answer 1

This Question is just to hard to answer.God Bless You!

Answer 2

Yes we should modify the criminal system. There is no such thing as free will, especially since many of our actions are unconscious. The conscious in fact is just a window into our own brain processes and has no control over how they work. Why do we not look at the big picture for a change and get over ourselves?

However, people that disrupt the community should be removed from it. The problem is that we always have to place the blame on someone or something. When there is no blame to place we are left to sit in our own anger with nothing to direct it at. People hat that. So we lash out at the criminals that hurt us. My problem with that is that it is bad ethically because the criminals are only doing what they can do. Shouldn't we be concerned with rehabilitation rather than punishment?

Most of us have committed some type of crime but have gotten away with it. How many movie stars have drove while under the influence? What if they killed someone? Didn't they know what could happen before they did it? Shouldn't their punishment be the same? Punishment should fit the crime. Murder is murder right?

Either way, punishment is not the answer. It only makes us guiltier of the thing we hate the most. A civilized society would try to rehabilitate these people, and if that wasn't possible then we should at least just keep them from our society by putting them in a mental institution. Prison treats people like animals and absolutely does not rehabilitate in fact it makes the criminals more bitter and angry against society and law enforcers.

If a schizophrenic person goes on a mass murdering spree because he believes he is a demon doing God’s will would you want to put them to death? What if a sadistic serial killer kills a bunch of people? Both are probably incapable of rehabilitation. Both of them are also mentally ill. A normal person couldn't do either of these terrible things. The only difference is that the serial killer was aware of what he was doing and just wanted to kill people for his own pleasure. However, could he have control over his deranged urges? Probably not.

Would any of you go on a massive killing spree? Do you think you could ever do it? Why not? You have free will to do whatever you want right? No. Most people that commit terrible and not so much as terrible crimes always have some sort of brain dysfunction. Criminals have impulse control problems, and inadequate functioning in some parts of the brain responsible for regulating the very problems they have.

Our system and the people that believe in it are uneducated and unwilling to accept the truth of these biological truths and ethical issues. I think a change is well overdue.

Answer 3

If we can accurately determine the causes of behavior, and figure out what is done by choice versus not, that gives us one more tool toward solving the problems.

Remember that the criminal justice system has two primary goals: deterrence, and punishment or protection. Many laws and sentences are based on the concept that if we make there be a punishment for some action, people will choose not to commit that action. However, that model fails if the action was not done by choice.

The other aspect of the system is keeping society safe by locking up people who are a threat. Well, if the goal is to stop the threat, then the more we understand about the cause of the threat, the more we can make intelligence strategic decisions about the best and most effective way to stop the threat.

The bottom line is that if we want to achieve the goals, the more information we have about how and why crimes are committed, the more effective we can be about both punishment and prevention.

Answer 4

Granted chemical processes can affect ones behavior, however if according to psycho-chemistry everyone’s behavior is negated by chemical processes, the fact that I like to only cross the street at a pedestrian crossing is purely chemical.
Such as with most medical and psychological theories, some supporters tend to want to fit the world into their specific paradigm. We are however taught time and time again that there needs to be a shift to a more holistic world view. Not any ONE theory can explain behavior. It is necessary to look at the situation and depending on this try to explain it using the theory as a positive construct. It helps our understanding. The fact that someone is bipolar may be due to a chemical reaction and prescribing medication would be the apt response. If testing however shows that it is not due to a chemical imbalance, medication would be inappropriate. Behavior may have a chemical component, however past experience, culture, socio-economic background... all of these have a part to play and we should pay attention to the fact.
If a person’s behavior is detrimental to their own functioning or poses a threat to society, it is our moral responsibility to take some kind of action. Here I feel that it is not a case of placing blame, however as stated before by carogryph deterrence and protection. Where western thought focuses on the individual, we need to move more towards community where the focus is on the functioning of the community where the member needs to assisted and potentially re-integrated. The community needs to take of the role of a support system.
Again... granted the severity may be such that re-integration is not possible and an alternative action needs to be taken. And the appropriateness of this action would depended on the community (or society as a whole) hence penal and psychiatric institutions.
Coming back to the question, chemical processes in the brain do not have a direct influence on the things poeple do. It depends on the persons decision making processes, how they view the concequences of their behavior, and their built in moral indicator . Depending on the strength of these, chemical processes may have a larger influence in negating behavior, however it does not have the last say.

Answer 5

Yes. If someone is chemically programmed to kill people we should definitely hold them responsible for their actions. If someone is chemically programmed to rape or molest children then we should hold them responsible for their actions. What's your beliefs on this? It's no excuse to get away with things. They are not Zombies and they are making their own decisions. Even If they don't make the decision themselves, do YOU want people going around doing those things and being excused to do them again?

Answer 6

People are always accountable for their actions. To suggest otherwise is to deceive oneself and to allow blame to be placed elsewhere other than self.

Answer 7

No, we should ignore the victims rights, and release psychopaths back into the public to continue to violate other peoples rights, because it is "not their fault".

p.s. I hope you realize I am being sarcastic.


-----------------------------------------

Where do you draw the line? Should noone be held responsible for their actions because somewhere in their life, something led them to make that decision?

------

If you havn't seen it yet, you would enjoy "clockwork orange".