On 27/05/07, John Ku <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 5/26/07, Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> What if the normative governance system includes doing terrible things?
>

I think for some people, namely sociopaths, it probably sometimes does.

Now evolution has given most of us emotions such as feelings of
obligation, guilt, shame and care. Given the importance of social relations,
our genes programmed us through those emotions to care directly about such
things as cooperation, the well-being of others, not defecting in collective
action problems, not harming others, etc. Now I think the adaptive benefit
of having a normative governance system (basically a general reasoning
system that is able to revise not just our beliefs but also our desires and
emotions) on top of that was essentially to provide more flexibility in
pursuing the values our emotions are directed towards in novel situations
and not, for instance, to replace or fundamentally change those values. So,
for most of us who have these emotions, I think the normative governance
system will prescribe feelings of obligation not to do terrible things, to
care about potential victims, feel guilt, etc.

But there are humans, sociopaths, who lack these moral emotions. You can
see fMRI scans that show that when they make "moral" judgments, they are
using fundamentally different parts of their brain from the rest of us, and
many other tests also reveal they lack emotions like guilt, shame, care, and
love. The emotions and motivations they have will pretty much just be
self-interested or malevolent. (I believe there are models of evolutionary
game theory that can explain that having around 1% of a population be
sociopaths while the rest are not is an evolutionarily stable strategy and
equilibrium point.) Their normative governance system will do the same thing
in them of trying to more flexibly pursue the values their emotions direct
them towards. So, since they lack the moral emotions, it will almost
certainly end up prescribing doing terrible things in some circumstances.
Thus, their reasons will be different from our's. I think there is simply no
way around that. If the concept of reasons is to play a role in actually
guiding human action and deliberation, it will have to be sensitive to these
sorts of big differences in psychology. Any alternate concept of reasons not
able to guide action seems pretty worthless to me.

So, sociopaths sometimes have reasons to do terrible things. We, on the
other hand, have reasons not to do terrible things and furthermore, have
pretty strong reason to stop them from doing terrible things. Luckily, we
outnumber them. So, I think we basically treat them as we might a dangerous
animal. If they really are a true sociopath (and not just someone who has
not deliberated properly about what morality demands), I think it doesn't
even make sense to punish them. Punishment is only appropriate when they
have the relevant capacity to regulate their actions in accordance with
moral demands. Without the basic repertoire of moral emotions they are just
as unable to do this as, say, a shark that attacks people. Thus, sociopaths
are really outside of the domain of moral reasons. As we might say of
sharks, what they are doing is certainly *bad* but not morally wrong.


Every society has sociopaths, and generally recognises them as such and
deals with them. The problem is that through most of history, "normal"
people have thought it was OK to treat slaves, women, Jews, homosexuals etc.
in ways considered terrible by people in different eras. For all I know, I
may be committing a barbaric crime in the mildly challenging tone of this
post, when looked at by the standards of future or alien cultures. And even
within a relatively homogeneous culture there are basic disagreements, such
as between those who think it's OK to eat animals and those who don't. I
don't dispute that it is worthwhile trying to arrive at a rational ethical
system given certain moral premises, but how do we agree on the premises?


--
Stathis Papaioannou

-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&user_secret=7d7fb4d8

Reply via email to