Ethics on the Brain

[applegrove]

Ethics on the Brain
by Stephanie Bird
Science & Spirit

Neuroscience has uncovered compelling links between biology and moral behavior. What this means for our notions of personal responsibility is an open question.


"Imagine two scenarios. In the first, you are driving down the street and are suddenly overcome by a fit of sneezing. You veer off to the right, and by the time you come to a stop, you realize, to your horror, that you have hit a young woman walking on the sidewalk. She is pinned against a brick wall and, despite emergency treatment, will be paralyzed below the waist for life.

In the second scenario, you are driving a pickup truck on a fine summer morning when you suddenly notice a bee buzzing around inside. You are frightened because you think you might be allergic to bee stings, and while trying to kill the bee with a handy newspaper, you swerve into oncoming traffic, hitting a small car head-on. The driver, a young father of two, is killed.

Are you morally responsible in either of these cases (both of which actually occurred), and should you be held legally responsible? In each case, you can honestly say you didn’t mean to cause harm, and it makes a difference that there was neither conscious nor unconscious intent. Still, could you have foreseen the potential consequences of your distraction? We expect people to exercise self-control. We all know that it is difficult but not impossible to stifle a sneeze; you might do so in a classroom, for instance. We could argue that we have even more control over how we respond to our fears than we do to our impulses. Shouldn’t we be expected, then, to not allow ourselves to be distracted by fear of a bee sting when engaged in something as risky as driving?

We could imagine a spectrum of situations in which the degrees of self-control and personal responsibility would be up for debate. Consider one final scenario: In a fit of anger, a man hits his girlfriend’s young daughter for accidentally spilling a drink on him. He is arrested, but while in jail awaiting trial, doctors discover he has a tumor in a brain region linked to emotional behavior. The tumor is surgically removed, and the man’s angry outbursts diminish. At his trial, the judge declares that the insanity defense was created for this type of situation, and the man is released. Did the judge do the right thing? Should we make allowances when there is evidence that biological factors have led a person to act in a particular way?

....SNIP"

http://www.science-spirit.org/newdirections.php?article_id=651

[applegrove]

1. As long as they are sane..they should go to jail. Not having morals

for biological reasons may mean it takes someone longer to grow up or whatnot..And unless the law is right there waiting for them when they cross a criminal line...they will never bother to learn.

We have always known some people are born different ways. As long as we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.. no excuses will be accepted by sane people who cross a legal line.

[Demeter]

2. There Is One Criterion

A sudden and inexplicable personality change due to a tumor or stroke is one thing; a continuous or increasingly deteriorating pattern of unacceptable behavior is another.

The first is not something we can expect or control. We can only hope to remove the cause.

The second is a personality disorder. It is formed early in life, if not in utero, and is not brought under control by the socialization efforts of family and society.

What is or is not acceptable may be up for debate. Some groups wish to make sexual preference variations unacceptable, but society in general is rethinking this. Diversity is one thing. Doing harm to others is another.

Someday we may have the means to prevent or repair the personalities of sociopaths, narcissists, and borderline disorders.


The examples given in the original posting are errors in judgment--a whole different problem. These are not examples of illness-caused error, or personality disorder-caused error. They aren't subject to amelioration by medicine.

The cures for errors in judgment are training, experience, and if the individual's intellectual or motor skill gifts aren't up to the task, restriction from operating dangerous equipment.

[applegrove]

3. I agree there may be treatments for the morally insane some day

soon. And we can only hope that means fewer of them get into power like they did in soviet union, Germany, Uganda, Namibia, Yugoslavia, Romania, Cambodia, Rwanda, Turkey and..it seems like in the Sudan today. Or at least there may be brain scans someone has to pass to get into certain jobs. All very future shock. But closer than we think this technology.