On Ability and Accountability

I believe, as I've mentioned before, in free will; but it often bothers me to what extent we have it. It is a question in part of ability and of accountability.

For the first, we may call it ability, talent, a gift, or skill. Many of the greatest of our atheletes, thinkers, and politicians showed their gift and started training at an early age, say, from four to ten. How much of that was a conscious choice? I hardly remember my decisions from that point in my childhood; I can hardly believe that my early academic success was a result of any particular understanding on my part. It was my parents' teaching, my general upbringing, and perhaps my genes. I feel I had no real control over the direction of my life then, and that much of what has happened since has been a direct result of subconcious influences. It does not seem, however, quite so simple as "nature versus nurture," for even if we ever solved that puzzle, there is still the factor of the self. Perhaps now, at 23, I have a conscious, deliberate approach to my actions, but to what extent I can only wish I knew.

Which brings me to accountability. I have always favored the death penalty, and I still have faith in our justice system, deeply flawed as it is. Yet a case like that of Andrea Yates -- the Texan woman who drowned her five children -- gives pause to our sense of accountability. I believe, first of all, that sentencing her to life was the right choice; five children are dead and that should not go unpunished. But it still remains an uneasy task to pin guilt where free will has come into question; it would be an easy formula enough if we could find the proportion of free will to determinism. Of course, that will never happen.

However, I consider myself to have a relatively strong morality and strong will. If I were in the place of others and committed their crimes, there would be no question of my complicity: I have the capicity to decide and thus chose poorly. But we are not all raised in the same manner. So should justice be tailored to individuals? Or are our common bonds of humanity an overriding factor: society and unity over individual spirit and consciousness? Obviously, as with many things, this requires balance; yet I tend towards the former. For though I can imagine a status of having no choice -- insanity, perhaps, or even inhumanity -- the loss of accountability is too high a price to pay for loss of a stable and safe nation.

And therein lies the paradox. If I accept (as I seem to) that ability is in large part a result of our childhood, then why not also accountability? Should those born lucky be praised, and those born unlucky punished? Certainly, there are those born high that fall low, and those born low that climb high. But can even incompetence or determination be attributed to one's upbringing and heredity? How much of the adult mind is malleable, and how is much set in its way? If we are to be practical, it seems we must also be somewhat hypocritical; though that is a price I personally am almost always willing to pay. Thus, despite ability and accountability being grounded in similar philosophical problems, I believe that they have to be dealt with differently by society. Nevertheless, the question of free will continues to bring into question just how different their treatment has to be.  ¶ 10:49 PM