IntroductionThis essay explores why people should not be held fully morally responsible for their choices. It first draws from theories developed by scholars in psychology and sociology, then refers to case studies in criminality to explore these ideas. The first part explores the 'just world' fallacy, which explains that people wish to believe the world is just, thus most have a desire for others to be held responsible for their choices. Whilst that may be the case, people's choices are undoubtedly influenced by their environmental and genetic conditions. This suggests that social circumstances and innate factors are the main influencers on our behaviour, which means that people are not fully responsible for their choices. The second and third sections use academic research and case studies in criminogenic literature to explore the extent to which social environment and innate factors influence people's choices and lead some individuals or groups to criminality. Finally, in conjunction with Jung's complex theory, I conclude that poor social conditions and congenital deficiencies can make people more susceptible to mental illness and be more prone to irrational, criminal acts, especially when violence is concerned. This leads me to argue that prisons should rehabilitate criminals rather than punish them. As criminals cant possibly take full moral responsibility for their choices, empathy rather than retribution should be societys focus.Main bodyMelvin J Lerner developed the just world fallacy in the 1960s. This theory puts forth the case that people often think the world is fair only to understand or cope with various injustices.[1]It thus explains why people are keen to attribute the mistakes of others or to their own personal behaviour for a misfortune, as opposed to pointing to the circumstances and other factors beyond their control.[2] Conversely, if one has a positive or beneficial outcome, they often attribute its cause to their own efforts. The key thesis of this concept is that humans need a sense of just deserts in order to make sense of reality. In one study, for instance, Melvin J Lerner asked a group of students to observe a girl receive electric shocks as a punishment for making a mistake on a faux mission.[3] Following the observation, the students disparaged the victim and behaved as if she deserved the harsh punishment she received. At the same time, however, they also recognised that they felt powerless to help the girl. This observation demonstrates that a punishment, especially one carried out by an authority figure, can play in to the just world fallacy and suspend critical thought. The Just World fallacy may also compliment Jung's view that human begins are in state of moral conflict. This is due to our innate awareness that we are imperfect, a realisation that triggers a type of trauma-complex."[4] This forces people to behave irrationally in ways that are not otherwise acceptable to the self, as the confrontation between their ego and this complex disturbs them.[5] Jung, however, believed that everyone was more or less prone to multiple personalities as everyone had complexes.[6] This means that with the right amount of psychological help and understanding of people's 'attitudes' (introversion and extroversion), people are largely able to maintain a healthy state of mind and are less likely to behave in extreme ways. As such, Jung can grant us insights about the issue of moral responsibility as he views our consciousness as far from a singular entity with one narrative. He is, therefore, still of great influence in how we can understand the complexities of personality.Modern psychology, however, now demands more scientifically rigorous studies that explore the complexities of consciousness. Firstly, genes may play a role in determining human behaviour. This is because genes can not only determine ones sex or biological structure of the human body in general, but may also may influence ones psychological characteristics.[7] According to Laura A. Baker, the genes of ones parents can influence an individuals behaviour (including the way they raise their children), and children's genes influence their behaviour in return (including the way they react to their parents).[8] For example, in one controversial study, working-class families and their descendants are more likely to possess genes that predispose individuals to aggressive behaviour. This is because, the study argues, their ancestors were more likely to drink or used drugs which can cause genetic defects. These defected genes then pass on to their offspring, depriving them of what could have been their expected learning abilities and physiological systems. This is called epigenetics, which means people's diseases, behaviours, and other health indicators are inherited from family members a generation or even several generations prior.[9]Notwithstanding, although genes are essential to understanding ones predisposition to certain behaviours, factors such as the political environment and ones socialisation directly also influence thoughts and behaviour. As mile Durkheim famously argued, individuals or social groups who do not follow what is deemed the acceptable rules of the society are deviants.[10] Whilst Durkheim viewed deviants as necessary elements of the social structure, most people arguably suppress their true thoughts and actions in order to conform to the moral maxims that are generally expected of them. This is the case even if it results in them not achieving their personal goals. Jung, once again, is useful to draw from here, as he uses the term "persona" to describe the phenomenon where people choose to hide their true selves in order to form functional relations with society.[11] For example, in Solomon Aschs conformity experiments, fifty students were asked to take a "visual test" in a room alongside several other observers. They did not know, however, whether the other participants were also students. Within this experiment, non-student observers gave wrong answers to 12 of 18 questions. They did this to see if the students would change their answers to match the rest of the group. What the study found was that although the students gave a correct answer at first, they then they gave the wrong answer based on the observer's answer.[12] This demonstrates the powerful effects of peer pressure and socialization on ones actions.According to another study conducted by Paul Willis showed that students from working-class families have a negative attitude towards education.[13] They may, for instance, disrupt class or not follow school rules. Willis argues that the reason why working-class people are more likely to engage in deviant behaviour than the other people from other classes is because of social inequality.[14] As working-class family do not have the financial means to provide quality education for their children as middle-class and upper-class families do, working-class families may expect their children to find work earlier in life to support their families. However, as they are less qualified, they often have to work in factories or manufacturing industries as labourers for very little pay. Conversely, children of other classes have the opportunity to study in higher education, and thus use their knowledge and experience to attain well-paid jobs. Yet when working class children communicate with middle class children during their school years, they realize that they can't get the same treatment and experience as other classes. This, in turn, leads to violence to vent their frustrations. Albert Cohen therefore argued that when students don't get the status they aspire to, they tend to form a criminal subculture.[15] This could explain why working-class children are more likely to commit crimes.Accordingly, if someone commits a moral error such as a crime, its only logical to offer them rehabilitation than handing out punitive punishments. Criminals are not entirely in control of their actions, as they may be influenced by family upbringing or congenital factors that manifest as psychological problems. According to psychologist Thomas Fagan, many prison systems in recent years have finally realised that psychological care for mentally illness in prisons is of great importance.[16] This entails that prisons should be similar in their scope and ethos to mental hospitals, regardless of the difference in damage they may have done to society. In fact, it can be further deduced that all the mental deficiencies of criminals in prison may have even more serious symptoms than those admitted to mental health facilities. Hence, whilst criminals are punished by the law in prison, they undoubtedly also require psychological rehabilitation from doctors.One case study of interest is on conducted by James O. Beasley II on Offender Number Five, one of seven serial murder cases. Offender Number Five is a black male who grew up in a very unstable home and lived with his grandmother.[17]After his grandmother died, he turned to a life of crime and violence. He was arrested for a number of juvenile offenses, namely robbery, sexual assault, murder, and multiple thefts. Following his release from prison, he immediately resumed his murderous activities. His level of brutality was distinctive and shocking, as he robbed his victims of their mobility, sexually assaulted them, and finally beat them to death. One of his surviving victims eventually took him to court and he was sent back to prison.[18] In the interview, the criminal admitted that he had a strong sense of loneliness, yet he refused to communicate with others and chose to digest these feelings on his own.[19] As he got older, however, he found that he couldnt satisfy his sexual desire unless it was accompanied by violence against others.[20] Upon examination, he scored 33 on the psychopathic checklist, which is well above the diagnostic criteria for psychopathy.[21] This means he had little control over his actions and showed little remorse for his violent actions. Accordingly, Offender Number Five is a prime example of how poor socialization in childhood can induce psychopathy and breed criminality.ConclusionTo conclude, this essay has explored the extent to which social environment, genetic predisposition, and mental illness can influence people's choices. It first explored some Jungian psychology, which suggested that ones personality is more complex and multifaceted than it might seem on the surface. This led the essay to modern theories that a poor social environment may lead to epigenetic predispositions that induce psychological problems of inferiority and vulnerability. This chain reaction results in worsening psychological problems, which leads people to lose themselves and engage in extreme behaviour that they do not expect and cannot control. Hence, as there is plenty of evidence that people do not necessarily have control over their actions and choices, it is logically unsound to hold them not responsible for their moral decisions. Therefore, prisons should allocate more resources towards psychological rehabilitation, namely psychological counselling or drug treatment, which may compensate for the psychological defects of the primary socialisation stage and allow them to recover quickly and return to society. Finally, further research into this topic may seek to explore the other extreme of the spectrum. What leads sometimes to a life of joy and success? What factors are present in their upbringing? Perhaps even a comparative study between negative and positive examples may be helpful to illuminate the contrasts. Nevertheless, there is plenty more cases or examples than can be unearthed to grant insights to this question and prove my conclusion further.References

Abrams, D. (2019). Deviance - Sociological perspectives | Britannica. InEncyclopdia Britannica. britannica.com/topic/deviance/Sociological-perspectivesBaker, L. A. (2007). THE BIOLOGY OF RELATIONSHIPS: WHAT BEHAVIORAL GENETICS TELLS US ABOUT INTERACTIONS AMONG FAMILY MEMBERS.De Paul Law Review,56(3), 837846. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4685725/Beasley, J. O. (2004). Serial murder in America: case studies of seven offenders.Behavioral Sciences & the Law,22(3), 405. doi.org/10.1002/bsl.595Benson, E. (2003, July).Rehabilitate or punish?Www.apa.org; American Psychological Association. apa.org/monitor/julaug03/rehabCherry, K. (2019).How the Just-World Phenomenon Explains Victim-Blaming. Verywell Mind. verywellmind.com/what-is-the-just-world-phenomenon-2795304Cherry, K. (2020, April 3).The Asch Conformity Experiments. Verywell Mind; Verywellmind. verywellmind.com/the-asch-conformity-experiments-2794996Gadek, R. (2019).Rehabilitation Versus Punishment in the Adult Justice System. Criminaljusticeonlineblog.com. criminaljusticeonlineblog.com/11/rehabilitation-versus-punishment-in-the-adult-justice-system/Hadberg, A. V. (2006). The methodology of Paul Willis. A review of Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids get Working Class Jobs.Athenea Digital. Revista de Pensamiento E Investigacin Social,1(9). doi.org/10.5565/rev/athenea.275Khan Academy. (2008).Genes, environment, and behavior. Khan Academy. khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/behavior/behavior-and-genetics/a/genes-environment-and-behaviorKreitzer, M. J. (2016).What Impact Does the Environment Have on Us?Taking Charge of Your Health & Wellbeing. takingcharge.csh.umn.edu/what-impact-does-environment-have-usLerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observers reaction to the innocent victim: Compassion or rejection?.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,4(2), 203210. doi.org/10.1037/h0023562Lumen. (2018).Functionalism and Deviance | Introduction to Sociology. Courses.lumenlearning.com. courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-introductiontosociology/chapter/theoretical-perspectives-on-deviance/Mcleod, S. (2020, January 21).Stanford Prison Experiment. Simply Psychology; Simply Psychology. simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.htmlPaul, S., & Repository, S. (2020). The Criminal Behavior of Genes | Role of genes in criminal activity.Www.sciencerepository.org. doi.org/10.31487/sr.blog.14Santa Clara University. (2015).The Just World Theory. @SantaClaraUniv. scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/the-just-world-theory/Stein, M. (2017a).Jungs Map of th Soul : an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; p. 143). General distributor of Daiwa Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)Stein, M. (2017b).Jungs Map of the Soul : an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; p. 70). General distributor of Yamato Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)Stein, M. (2017c).Jungs Map of the Soul : an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; p. 60). General distributor of Daiwa Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)Stein, M. (2017d).Jungs Map of the Soul : an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; pp. 5659). General distributor of Daiwa Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)Stein, M. (2017e).Jungs Map of the Soul : an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; pp. 6667). General distributor of Daiwa Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)Thompson, K. (2016, May 31).Subcultural Theories of Deviance. ReviseSociology. revisesociology.com/2016/05/31/subcultural-theories-crime-deviance/tutor2u. (2019, April).Classic Texts: Paul Willis Learning to Labour 1977. Tutor2u. tutor2u.net/sociology/reference/classic-texts-paul-willis-learning-to-labour-1977tutor2u. (2020, March 8).Classic Texts: Albert Cohen Delinquent Boys. Tutor2u. tutor2u.net/sociology/reference/classic-texts-albert-cohen-delinquent-boys-1955Weinhold, B. (2006). Epigenetics: The Science of Change.Environmental Health Perspectives,114(3). doi.org/10.1289/ehp.114-a160

[1] Cherry, K. (2019).How the Just-World Phenomenon Explains Victim-Blaming. Verywell Mind. verywellmind.com/what-is-the-just-world-phenomenon-2795304[2] Ibid[3] Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observers reaction to the innocent victim: Compassion or rejection?.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,4(2), 203210. doi.org/10.1037/h0023562[4] Stein, M. (2017b).Jungs Map of the Soul: an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; p. 70). General distributor of Yamato Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)[5] Ibid, pp. 5659[6] Ibid, pp. 6667[7] Baker, L. A. (2007). THE BIOLOGY OF RELATIONSHIPS: WHAT BEHAVIORAL GENETICS TELLS US ABOUT INTERACTIONS AMONG FAMILY MEMBERS.De Paul Law Review,56(3), 837846. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4685725/[8] Ibid, pp. 837-846[9] Weinhold, B. (2006). Epigenetics: The Science of Change.Environmental Health Perspectives,114(3). doi.org/10.1289/ehp.114-a160[10] Lumen. (2018).Functionalism and Deviance | Introduction to Sociology. Courses.lumenlearning.com. courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-introductiontosociology/chapter/theoretical-perspectives-on-deviance/[11] Stein, M. (2017a).Jungs Map of the Soul: an Introduction(K. Zhu, Trans.; p. 143). General distributor of Daiwa Books and Newspapers, Xin Bei Shi. (Original work published 1998)[12] Cherry, K. (2020, April 3).The Asch Conformity Experiments. Verywell Mind; Verywellmind. verywellmind.com/the-asch-conformity-experiments-2794996[13] tutor2u. (2019, April).Classic Texts: Paul Willis Learning to Labour 1977. Tutor2u. tutor2u.net/sociology/reference/classic-texts-paul-willis-learning-to-labour-1977[14] Ibid[15] tutor2u. (2020, March 8).Classic Texts: Albert Cohen Delinquent Boys. Tutor2u. tutor2u.net/sociology/reference/classic-texts-albert-cohen-delinquent-boys-1955[16] Benson, E. (2003, July).Rehabilitate or punish?Www.apa.org; American Psychological Association. apa.org/monitor/julaug03/rehab[17] Beasley, J. O. (2004). Serial murder in America: case studies of seven offenders.Behavioral Sciences & the Law,22(3), 405. doi.org/10.1002/bsl.595[18] Ibid, pp. 405[19] Ibid, pp. 405[20] Ibid, pp. 405[21] Ibid, pp. 405

Continue reading here:
To what extent human beings are morally responsible for the actions they take as a result of their innate and acquired influences - Teen Ink

Comments are closed.