Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxi.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!ihuxi!snafu From: snafu@ihuxi.UUCP (Dave Wallis) Newsgroups: net.misc,net.politics,net.religion,net.women Subject: Re: Guilt and punishment Message-ID: <794@ihuxi.UUCP> Date: Sat, 4-Feb-84 10:51:42 EST Article-I.D.: ihuxi.794 Posted: Sat Feb 4 10:51:42 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 8-Feb-84 06:04:50 EST References: <791@ssc-vax.UUCP> <440@pyuxn.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Technologies, Inc., Naperville Il. Lines: 69 Rich, I think your notion that our behavior is based only on chemical reactions deserves a closer look. This is not really a new question - philosophers have been looking at it for a long time. On the micro level (i.e. at the cellular level) it seems clearly evident that you are correct - cell actions are governed by the chemical reactions on which they are based. But do those chemical interactions really generalize to the macro level? What you have implied in your article is that our behavior is completely determined by our chemistry - i.e. that we have no free will. Your position would have all of humankind wandering the planet as nothing more than chemical robots, making no rational decisions, since all actions and reactions would have been pre-programmed. I find this idea very hard to accept. The situation that would result from this is what we identify in animals as "instinct." In examining the world around him, man has long noticed that there is something "different" about him - man has been able to improve his position in the environment, develop tools, written language, etc. What could have given man his ability to grow and learn except the ability to think and make decisions on a level other than the instinctual one? The very fact that we can question whether or not our decisions are based on free will or chemistry indicates that mere chemical reaction does not fully explain our thought and decision making processes. What this all boils down to in this discussion is that I think people can and should be held accountable for their own actions. I agree that the rules, laws and customs of a society are arbitrary - any other set would undoubtedly work just as well (or better), but that set of rules is really what enables a society to exist at all. They provide a common ground - a way for one person to predict what another will do, or to decide what others expect of him. Except in instances where a severe chemical imbalance prevents normal operation of our decision making process, I believe that people *do* have the ability to determine whether a particular behavior falls inside or outside of the behavior deemed acceptable by the particular society. Note that I do not deny that chemistry has anything to do with decision making, but I do disagree that it is the only thing that governs it. A problem does occur when one or more individuals disagree on what the rules of the society are. Most societies have a method for resolving these disagreements - they vote. If an individual defies the rules that define the society, the society really has no choice other than to remove that individual from the society. If they did not, it would soon be the case that nobody would be able to determine what was proper or improper behavior, and the "society" would cease to exist. I suppose there would be nothing to prevent the rapists from starting their own culture where rape is considered the friendly thing to do (same with any other criminal group), but I seriously doubt that it would be a stable culture for long. Cultures (societies) exist because they are advantageous to man, and the advantage is that they provide an environment of cooperation and mutual goals. A society based on rules that are anti-cooperative would not provide an advantage for its members, and therefore would not survive long. So there you have my ideas on the matter. Sorry to get on my soapbox for so long, but some things require more of a response than "I disagree!". I'll be happy to respond to any responses/flames, with the exception of the really off-the-wall flames which I use to line my cats' litter box. -- Dave Wallis ihnp4!ihuxi!snafu AT&T Technologies, Inc. (312) 979-5894