In support of the rage of man

[Yonadav]

If we judged no one for having trouble controlling an instinct, and we treated such behavior as unfair, there would be no justice system left. No one would be held accountable for their actions, or, at least, they would not be judged.

I think we're moving in that direction.  Certainly, I've seen a lot of talk in these forums about how free will is essentially illusory due to material determinism.  And brain studies on death row inmates show by far that there are brain structure issues that lead to their behaviors.

But consider other instincts.  Should we tax obese people more because their health care is likely to pose a burden to taxpayers or the co-insured?  Should we be offended at their unwillingness not to pose an inconvenience on those around them, and shout at them that we feel "sorry for your family?"  No-- I think we understand that the brain is hard-wired at a genetic level to prefer foods that are highly detrimental, and that the brain systems involved have such high priority that overriding them consciously is difficult (or for some, impossible).

I think the point of punishment is that 1) it's a punitive response to a deliberate abuse of free will; 2) it is meant to discourage negative behaviors by pre-emptive threat or by conditioning via negative reinforcement; 3) it is meant, in the case of incarceration, to protect the general populace from a few bad apples.

If you are a determinist, then (1) really should go right out the window.  If a behavior is not controllable by the person, then (2) will fail.  It's (3) that we have to focus on-- you don't have to demonize people with a strong predisposition toward expression of anger to say, "Look. . . you know we can't let you free in an environment where you are likely to behave this way.  You need to be removed, unless you are willing to undergo treatments (like drugs) that we think are likely to minimize your behavior."

I don't agree that 2 fails in hard determinism.