Sunday, April 11, 2010

Punishment and condemnation

I've heard people ask the same question that Robert Wright, author of Moral Animal, poses in this column:
In this view, if I had Tiger Woods’s genes, and was born into his environment, I’d become exactly what he’s become. And so too with all others who violate norms or laws, including the most heinous criminals: If any of us had been born with their genes, into their environment, presumably we’d have become them. So how can we possibly condemn or punish them? Yet, as a practical matter, we have to punish heinous criminals, right?
First, I'd like to respond to his major premise: that athletes like Tiger serve as de facto role models in our society, and so their personal behavior off the athletic field is very important. He may be right that children do hold up athletes as role models, but perhaps this is a failure in our parenting. Perhaps the focus ought to be on getting children to recognize altruistic and philanthropic behaviors as superior indicators of character, and thus emulation, to athletic prowess. Perhaps we should spend more time explaining that athletes are just really good at their sport, not superheroes worthy of all-around emulation.

Back to his moral dilemma: it's not so troubling to worry about justification if all we're doing is condemning bad behavior with rhetoric. But the more substantive thorny issue involves crime and punishment: "Well, if people just behave how their genes and environment cause them to, then how can we blame/condemn them for it?" The feeling is that we aren't justified in blaming someone if they "can't help themselves" on some level.

It's important to note that the issue of justice and punishment don't have to involve some sort of moral high ground. When we lock up a murderer or rapist, we are protecting society from a dangerous person. On purely utilitarian grounds, this person has forfeited their right to go freely in society by behaving in such a way as to pose a grave threat to the freedoms of others to do the same. And so we don't have to say we're "better" than that person. We just have to say that we don't pose the same threat as they do, and so punishment does not have to equal condemnation.