Reply to comment

I have been thinking about the "it's all brain" argument and I am wondering how the legal system would be transformed if the majority of society accepted the Dickinsonian perspective.  If everything in life were a construction of our brains, then a sense of right versus wrong, the notion of justice and fairness, would merely be construed as constructions. Serial killers would be pardoned merely on the fact that their brains had constructed the crime.  They would not be sentenced to the death penalty or to life in prison because the defense would easily argue that it was because of their brains that they possessed no control over their actions.  Everything could be tried on the basis of insanity or a chemical imbalance or a result of some improper or just unusual or even usual proceedings of the brain.  The prosecution would have no right to say that their minds were polluted because the suspect would be presumed to have no mind, have no will power, have no control, and have only brain.  When considering the legal system and how it functions, it seems clear to me that the majority of society accepts the brain and mind model.  It is clear that the majority of society accepts the premise that we have brains, but that we also have minds that direct us to make crucial and significant decisions.  When you hear about serial killers, rapists, robbers, etc. you do not generally hear the media and society attributing this behavior to the brain, but to the person, the individual, the whole package.  You hear about how the person is sick, disgusting, disturbed, etc. Why do we rarely say that their brain must be sick?  There is something about these "criminals" that makes them different from the rest of the "normal" individuals whom adhere to societal laws.  If we were to say, yes, it is all brain, then can we really blame those people whose brains are steering them in the "wrong" direction?  I think there has to be something deeper - something not so physical and concrete that drives morality.  We cannot just offer people a cop out for crime.  Yeah, he shot that guy, but what can we do?  It was just his brain, just a series of inputs and outputs that drove that action?  How are we to control that?  I argue that it is not that simple and if it is, the majority of society does not agree that it is.  I think the majority of society thinks that there is a mind, that there is an element of control we have over ourselves, over our brain.  If we accepted that everything is a construction of the brain and that everyone is unique, with a unique brain, then how could we establish rules of right versus wrong and how could we ever come to any conclusions on morality and shared human values.  You think about how often people fail to live up to societal values and it is crazy to think that maybe it is really not them, and not their fault, but their brains' fault.  Can we blame the brain?