[ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment

[gts]

Pure retributive justice is punishment for its own sake, considered  
separate from issues of deterrence and rehabilitation. Capital punishment  
is motivated largely by belief in retributive justice.

But for retributive justice to make sense, there must be a causally  
autonomous self who deserves punishment. If a prosecutor desires  
retributive justice then the burden of proof is on him to prove the  
defendant is a causally autonomous self. The defense needn't prove the  
truth of determinism. The prosecutor must prove the defendant had absolute  
freedom to commit the crime or to not commit the crime and that he was not  
driven by other factors (nature/nurture/whatever).

But I maintain that no prosecutor can provide such proof. The best he can  
do is argue, (along with philosophers like Searle, Hume and others), that  
people think and act "as if" free will is true.

That observation about human psychology is all well and good, saith the  
wise men and women on the jury, but it's not proof that the defendant  
actually had free will. Such philosophical musings are not sufficient  
evidence to send a man to fry in the electric chair.

-gts