I really enjoyed the question posed by Dom Cooper in his post "Determinism and the Legal Process". He posed a very intriguing set of circumstances to debate. Personally, I don't think considering a (hypothetical) correlation between morality and determinism would necessitate change in the legal system; however I do believe the arguments used to reach convictions may be causeless . If an attorney has a guilty client- considering a determinist moral construct- what argument could be made to combat a universal truth founded that each individual is determined to carry out certain actions? If a man kills another man, determinist morality dictates that his beliefs intended for this to occur. He would be certifiably guilty due to the structure of determinism and the idea that variances from "free will" and choices do not exist. His deterministic actions will resound for his entire life- he will never repent for the actions he was determined to commit.
We would have a world of convicts and murderers incapable of inhibitions or moral input. I then ponder if the legal system would alter our treatment of the guilty (ex. would extermination be allowed)
No comments:
Post a Comment