I just returned as an observer of the Mind-Life XIV conference held over five days at the residence of the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala. Essentially, these conferences assemble the top philosophers and scientists in such fields as quantum physics, astrophysics, biology, evolution, psychology, and neuroscience to discuss with His Holiness and other Tibetan scholars (geshes) their empirical research in "contemplative neuroscience."
To get right to the point, on the last day Mathieu Ricard led a discussion about the Buddhist view of "blame" and "responsibility" and how it diverges dramatically from the views of western civil and criminal traditions. Specifically, Buddhism's theory of causality and the illusory nature of "self" rules out any logical understanding of "blame" or "responsibility." To Buddhists, assigning blame, and resulting criminal punishment, is nothing short of vengeance and, as such, counterproductive in that it continues the "cycle of hate."
As I listened, I felt something missing: the deterrence potential of criminal punishment (aside from capital punishment, which most agree has nothing to do with that). Buddhists are nothing if not logical. Their ultimate goal is the cessation of suffering of all sentient beings. If one could show them that assigning blame and exacting the requisite punishment serves to ultimately reduce the rate of crime -- and the suffering it creates for both perpetrator (karmic cause and effects) and victim -- then that part of our western tradition might inform theirs in interesting ways. Do we know empirically if the fear of criminal punishment deters any categories of criminal behavior? If so, are there studies that one can cite as evidence of that?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
You have reached decision height.
