Separating the offender from the crime

I recently read a passage in Howard Cutler's book with the Dalai Lama, "The Art of Happiness in a Troubled World" discussing the root of acts of cruelty. Are some people fundamentally evil? The Dalai Lama argues 'no'. Many would argue for the opposite. Perhaps it is easier to separate Us from Them. If criminals are born fundamentally evil, than we can rest at ease with the knowledge that ourselves and our loved ones are not capable of turning down a violent path of bullying, abuse, even murder. To acknowledge the possibility that environmental conditioning plays a role in bringing about evil acts is frightening, because we realize the breadth of humanity with the potentiality for violence given the right circumstances. Others might critically reject this theory, accusing it of excusing the perpetrator of a violent act; but removing personal responsibility is not the intent. Anyone who has engaged in criminal behavior has a responsibility to recognize their wrongdoings, make reparations, and change. Some are more susceptible to violence that others; individual characteristics play a role. Not everybody who grows up in a violent community will learn violence as a way of life. Still, the Dalai Lama reserves the permanent label "evil" for the criminal act but not the criminal himself, implying that the offender's behavior is not inherently characteristic but rather temporary, learned after a period of negative conditioning. 

Nobody is born with a dehumanizing attitude. Rather, these things are cultivated over time, due to the interplay of personal traits and external conditioning. An exaggerated sense of the differences amongst individuals and social groups may lead to prejudice and discrimination, attitudes that set the foundations for inhumane treatment. Certainly, there are some born with the inability to read others' emotions, rendering them nearly incapable of feeling empathy, putting them in the risk category for sociopathic behavior. But even these people feel emotions of their own; they may not feel pain when another expresses pain, or joy in another's joy, but they are aware that those emotional experiences of their own occurs within each and every human being they encounter. With the right circumstances, the individual without empathy learns appropriate behavior through rationalization and positive environmental conditioning. 

As an example of how environment plays a role in moral behavior, Dalai Lama calls to mind a psychology experiment by Stanley Milgram (Yale) that has been repeated and confirmed many times. In the experiment, subjects are told they are engaging in research exploring new ways to improve memory. A 'Learner' is strapped into an electrical chair and asked a series of questions. The participants take on the role of the 'Teachers' and are asked to administer electrical shocks of increasing intensity each time the Learner responds incorrectly. (Unbeknownst to the subjects, the learner is actually a member of the experimenter's team and there are no actual shocks administered). As the shocks get more intense, the Learner begins to scream and writhe in pain, complains of a heart condition, bangs on the window to be released, and refuses to answer any more questions. But the 'scientist' encourages the subject to complete the experiment. At the very highest shock level, the Learner keels over and doesn't move, presumably unconscious or dead. An astounding two thirds of participants continued electrocuting the Learners up until the end. It appears that they're internal moral judgement was temporarily displaced by their trust in a knowledgeable 'authority' - in this case a man in a lab coat claiming to be a scientist. However, if researcher disguised himself as a participant in the study, and led the way in 'rebelling' against the scientist (refusing to continue administering shocks), 90% of the subjects followed suite. In yet another spin on the experiment, subjects were 'hired' as a part of the experimenter's team. When given a place of authority, the percentage was reversed - an astounding 90% encouraged shocks to be administered up until the end!

The Dalai Lama's example reveals how normal, morally sound individuals can be swayed by their leader into committing terrible acts of violence. Milgram's experiment also presents evidence of the groupthink phenomenon, in which individual judgement is sacrificed to evade social rejection or for the sake of interpersonal harmony. This tendency to displace moral reasoning into the hands of authority and follow societal norms has contributed to major social injustice such as racism and religious wars; It also plays a role in smaller-scale violence: for example, the current trend of submitting adolescents and young adults to violent initiation practices in school fraternities, marching bands, and sports teams. (This trend is discussed in more detail in Psychology Today's article Foolish Hazing). 

I am reminded of Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development, which discusses this tendency of members of society to allow their moral code to be dictated by an outside force, government and law, rather than inner reasoning. Kohlberg states that while this conventional stage of morality represents the majority of society, a small percentage of people reach a level of moral reasoning that more consistently reflects universal ethical principles, following their code of morality even in opposition to societal values. It seems Kohlberg was on track; his descriptions are consistent with the trends demonstrated by Milgram's experiment. While a select few will act according to their own moral standards regardless of circumstances, many people are heavily influenced by authority and the societal values surrounding them. The beginnings of violence can often be traced back to negative conditioning within an individual's community. It is not unreasonable to conclude that this process can work in reverse; that with sufficient positive reconditioning, many perpetrators of crime can learn to forgo a violent lifestyle. 

"Make no mistake: it is essential to maintain law and order. Real peace is not possible without it. But neither is peace possible without mercy, which is the basic ingredient of forgiveness and compassion, the true basis of a civilized society. We may take sides against crime, but we should be careful that we do not take sides against the 'sinners'."  - Jos Slabbert