I think I agree with that, but I'm not sure how it relates to free will and criminal justice.
Do you think that rationality is related or equivalent to free will???
I agree that someone's rationality may impact the efficacy of deterrence and Rehabilitation.
Both irrational and the rational would need reprogramming, just by different means. You would try to convince a rational person that it's in their interest to obey if you can. For an irrational person you'd have to use other means. This is basically how it works today.
Where does consent come into all of this? I understand that there maybe a difference in capacity to understand and consent, but not always. Irrational, for example impulsive people, can still consent. Normally consent isn't required for criminal justice to be carried out.
I’d argue that if someone is not capable of making a rational decision (aka are driven entirely by emotional reactions), and/or impulsive (aka not able to control their emotional impulses), they’re essentially not able to freely make decisions in fact.
They’re being driven by things they have no choice in, and no way to meaningfully actually control.
When that is happening, they don’t actually have free will.
And this is where my original statement around ‘90% of the time free will is a necessary lie we tell ourselves’.
It’s why emotional manipulation (including advertising and propaganda) is so remarkably effective, and why it is so remarkably prevalent. It works - very well - 90% of the time.
And the reason this matters (philosophically), is because someone isn’t actually consenting (in the medical ethical sense [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informed_consent]) if they never had an option to actually make a choice - aka if they have no free will.
In the criminal justice system, that also comes into play with plea bargains, mens rea, sentencing, etc.
It also comes into play with sexual relations. And business. And things like gambling (which we generally excuse by saying ‘they are adults and can make their own decisions’ which presumes actual free will). Depending on who you ask, it comes into play with recreational drugs -or should never apply to recreational drugs.
If people don’t have free will, then all those excuses, rationalizations, justifications, freedom, etc. make no sense.
What actually makes sense in a no-actual-free-will scenario is a state-machine-like series of conditioning/programming responses to produce an expected society and/or individual. At least from a utilitarian perspective.
Which from a philosophical perspective is severely dystopian, if explicitly stated that way, as there is no freedom or actual choice - only fate.
But may legitimately produce more aggregate human happiness. Or more aggregate absolute human misery.
Depending on the goal of the state machine and the actual rules and application in practice.
Do you think that rationality is related or equivalent to free will???
I agree that someone's rationality may impact the efficacy of deterrence and Rehabilitation.
Both irrational and the rational would need reprogramming, just by different means. You would try to convince a rational person that it's in their interest to obey if you can. For an irrational person you'd have to use other means. This is basically how it works today.
Where does consent come into all of this? I understand that there maybe a difference in capacity to understand and consent, but not always. Irrational, for example impulsive people, can still consent. Normally consent isn't required for criminal justice to be carried out.