One of the most vexing biological and philosophical problems of recent decades is free will.
We must punish violations of the rules—with all manner of sanctions, ranging from mild disapproval through exclusion from the group to execution. This is the absolute foundation without which any community will fall apart. Even the most free-thinking society has rules and some system for enforcing them, however informal.
Without this, communities disintegrate and we are unable to protect the vulnerable.
The problem lies in the idea that all this depends on the existence of free will. Someone freely chose to steal, and therefore bears the consequences and is punished for theft. How simple! Conversely, when someone’s actions were not the result of a free decision, most Western courts will acquit him; this also accords with our moral instincts.
Yet neuroscience over the past several decades suggests that our notion of free will was an illusion. Every one of our decisions is determined in the brain before we ourselves become aware of it. This can be measured quite easily. First, atoms in the brain move; only afterward come perception, feeling, thought, and decision-making.
Yet no neuroscientist argues that crimes should therefore be tolerated. Perhaps, in time, we will learn to hang criminals not with a sense of anger and vindication, but with a sorrowful sigh that there is no other way to protect the rest of us.
And perhaps this will also put an end to the disturbing practice of excusing crimes by invoking mental illness, a difficult childhood, and the like. A practice founded on ignorance and foolishness.