Death Penalty: Report From Canada

Max Sawicky sawicky at epinet.org
Sat Mar 6 12:19:52 PST 1999



> >> Arguments for the death penalty take a form of retributive
> >justice that _assumes_ free will and that human behavior is not
> >causally determined. >
> >
> >Just so. People are held responsible for their own actions.
> >They are not dumb brutes manipulated by their environment. Which
> >is the more humanistic view?
>
> I would go along with B.F. Skinner, who held that what distinguishes the
human species is not the possession of an "autonomous self" endowed with Free Will but rather, is the development of a culture, a social environment that contains the contingencies that generate the behaviors that we call self-knowledge and self-control.>>

Yecch.


> What Max labels the humanistic view, neglects the role of the social
environment in favor of a concern with the inner determination of conduct.>

I'd say a balanced view of both is the point, but to neglect the 'autonomous self' altogether, or whatever you'd like to call it, seems to me profoundly nihilistic. There is also the ominous potential of relating a behavioristic view to totalitarian modes of social control, though it would be an unfair stretch to find that in anything you have said.

mbs



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list