"Our personality stems from who we are as an identity. Our behavior is OUR behavior and is not a causeless phenomenon. We must own what we do. To create a false dichotomy between what we are as thinking beings and the activity we engage in purposefully is to lie to ourselves."
I agree with most of this, but you reach a moral and ethical quandery when you need to factor in the ultimate cause of behaviour, and to what extent the individual had any control over those causes. You're right to state behaviour is not a causeless phenomenon, however the philosophical and moral dilemnas begin when one attempts to trace these causes.....
Case in point: Phineas Gage. This was a well adjusted, socialized person who suffered a horrible and accidental brain injury, following this accident, Gage's entire personality changed, he engaged in completely inappropriate social behaviour and was unrecognizable from the person his family once knew.
Now, the question becomes, is Gage responsible for his actions? What does society do with Gage? Do we hold him accountable for crimes he commits? Do we lock him up? Not such simple black and white answers.
| “ | Gage was fitful, irreverent, indulging at times in the grossest profanity (which was not previously his custom), manifesting but little deference for his fellows, impatient of restraint or advice when it conflicts with his desires, at times pertinaciously obstinate, yet capricious and vacillating, devising many plans of future operations, which are no sooner arranged than they are abandoned in turn for others appearing more feasible. A child in his intellectual capacity and manifestations, he has the animal passions of a strong man. Previous to his injury, although untrained in the schools, he possessed a well-balanced mind, and was looked upon by those who knew him as a shrewd, smart businessman, very energetic and persistent in executing all his plans of operation. In this regard his mind was radically changed, so decidedly that his friends and acquaintances said he was 'no longer Gage.' Case in point # 2: Babies born to drug addicted mothers. We can say with near certainty these babies will grow up into socially maladjusted individuals and have a high propensity for criminal activity. We know their neural systems regulating behavioural control have been completely messed up due to in utero drug exposure. Now, are they to blame for this? Who does society hold accountable for any criminal activity they ultimately may engage in? Are they morally responsible for their actions, when their behavioural disorders were pre-determined before even being born? |
