View source for SEPT 7

==2: SEPT 7: Unit One: Introduction to MRFW problems==

===Assigned===

:*[https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/episodes/317421-blame Radio Lab Episode on Blame and Moral Responsibility]

:*Discuss [[Philosophical Methods]]

===Radio Lab Episode on Blame and Moral Responsibility===

:*'''Segment 1:''' Story of Kevin and his wife, Janet.  Kevin is arrested for child pornography.  
::*15 years earlier. Epilepsy seizures returned after surgery two years earlier. Can't drive so he meets Janet from work, who drives him to work. Romance... Still more seizures.  Another surgery. Music ability in tact.  But then his food and sexual appetite grew, played songs on the piano for hours.  Disturbing behavior.  Really disturbing behavior.

::*Reporter tries to get at who it was who did it.  Kevin claims compulsion.  downloads and deletes files.

::*Orin Devinsky: neurologist testified in court that it wasn't Kevin's fault. 

::*Neurological dive: deep parts of our brain can generate weird thoughts, but we have a "censor".  Maybe Kevin lost that part of his brain.  Observed in post-surgery monkeys. 

::*Lee Vartan -- Can't be impulse control.  porn at home, but not at work.  He must have known that it was wrong.  Teret's can be circumstantially triggered even though it is clearly neurological.  Poignant exchange with Janet about staying in the relationship.  '''Kluwer-Bucy'''.  Months before sentencing.  Medication makes him normal, but eliminates his libido.  5 yrs. - home arrest.  Judge ackn. prosecutor's point.  You could have asked for help. (Reflect on this a bit.  Consider the 
::*[https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/torts/torts-keyed-to-epstein/the-negligence-issue/the-t-j-hooper-3/ The T. J. Hooper Case])  26 months federal prison 25 months of house arrest.  2008-2010.      

:*Do you agree with prosecutor Vartan's point? What about the Judge's "liability/answerability" argument?  Why or why not? What would your sentence have been? (We'll do a small group discussion on this, after adding the information from Nita Frahany below.

:*'''Segment 2:'''  Blame - person or brain.  
::*Nita Frahany - neurolaw professor (law and philosophy!).  Might be lots of cases.  (argument: isn't this just like blame everything else for what you do wrong?  Isn't it too easy?).  Thought experiment: deaf person, child in burning building.  "emotional inability" would also be damage to a physical structure (as in the ear).  
::*David Eagleman, neuroscientist - makes critical point: neuroscience isn't so precise.  New technologies will show us how experience is written in our brain.  (Back to Descartes.  wrong.)  Slippery slope, the brain is always involved.  Blameworthiness might be the wrong question.  Person vs. biology doesn't really make sense anymore.  The "choosey" part of the brain (the homonculus!).  36:00 minutes.  Funny exchange.  Self-modification comes up.  
::*Claim: Legal system should drop moral blame.  Adopt utilitarian approach.  Predict recidivism.  Point system exists.  Better than people (50% accurate).  System 70%. Currently there is appearance bias for example.   
::*A point system might be very predictive, but you might not want to convict someone of a future crime.  Would it be?
::*Frahany - Blame might serve social function of articulating norms.  

:*Frahany thinks there are lots of cases of the criminal justice system punishing unfairly.  Are you persuaded? If so, does a utilitarian approach (with or without the point system) make sense? 

:*'''Segment 3:''' Dear Hector
::*Bianca Giaver (producer) - Hector Black.  Hector's backstory - joins civil rights movement, adopts Patricia, a neglected child.  Patricia's story (becomes a beautiful and productive person) -- Patricia is murdered.  Hector considers whether he wishes the death penalty for him. Hector's statement -- 48min. Writes a letter of forgiveness to the murderer. Ivan's story - son of schizophrenic mom, beat him, horror.  Do we still blame Ivan the same way.  Hector tells his story.  Many letters exchanged.  A strange bond.  Hector has self-doubts - sending care packages to Ivan???.  (Maybe he's just a weird guy.)
::*Ivan tells the original story of Patricia's murder.  Ivan hears a voice that sometime comes to him.  Commits the murder. Can't make sense of it.

:*Does Ivan's story change your view of the kind of threat he poses -- one from choosing evil/failing a responsiblity vs. compulsion?