No soul? No free will and no responsibility then, yet the latter's essential...

[AFTT47]

For society to function in any kind of moral way people need be held responsible for their actions (eg - crime).

What do you mean exactly by, "held responsible for their actions?"

I ask because that statement sounds like a call for punishment. Aside from deterrence, punishment is pointless. If I wrong you and you kick me in the balls in retribution, that doesn't really make anything right - even if I have free will. You might take satisfaction in the fact my balls hurt. It might have the utility of discouraging me from doing it again. But it doesn't reverse whatever wrong I did to you.

In my view, any kind of "justice" should be in the form of restitution. That's a good consequence to one's actions that's practical whether we have free-will or not.

For society to function, we need to have individuals to respect the common good. There will always be those who do not. If we deal with them pragmatically and logically rather than emotionally, does it really matter if they have free will or not?

1. Force restitution when possible.

2. Rehabilitate if possible.

3. Remove from society if necessary. Simply warehouse those individuals who are a danger to society and treat them humanely. Hold no malice for them.