u6lc1_ct

FREE CHOICE: THE MAINSPRING OF HUMAN ACTION

Every day we are confronted with the mystery of human action. One person commits an armed robbery, killing a guard in the process. Another person is found to have embezzled large sums of money from the charitable organization he directed. A firefighter risks his life to save the life of an infant trapped in a burning building. A peaceful protest gets out of control and turns into a violent and destructive altercation. A respected member of the community is accused of abusing the children on the teams that he coached. Two teenagers are accused of murdering their newborn infant and dumping the body in a garbage container. An 84-year-old woman who spent her life cleaning the homes of others donates her life savings—$186,000—to a local college with which she had no previous relationship. In each of these instances, and countless others, we struggle to understand “why” people acted the way they did. Our answers typically depend on our deepest beliefs about the nature of the human self. For example:

   Human nature:  “I believe in human nature; people are born with certain basic instincts that influence and determine how they behave.” Based on this view, the actions described previously, whether “good” or “evil,” are no more than the natural expression of a universal nature that is genetically hardwired into every person. From this perspective, we should no more hold people responsible for their destructive actions than we would an animal in the wild that kills in order to survive. There is no possibility of free choice because our actions necessarily follow from our inborn nature, and we cannot be other than who we are. Whether you act virtuously or destructively in your life is really beyond your control, and you cannot alter your fundamental character.

   The environment:  “I believe that people are shaped by their environment, conditioned by their experiences to be the kind of people they are.” From this vantage point, the actions described previously are the direct products of the life experiences that the individuals had. If the environment in which a person developed was deprived or abusive, then these forces shaped a violent individual with little regard for the rights or lives of others. On the other hand, if you were fortunate enough to grow up in a loving and nurturing environment in which kindness and empathy were considered paramount values, then this upbringing shaped who you are. But once again, you cannot be held responsible for how you turned out because you didn't choose your environment; you were a passive agent molded by forces beyond your control. And, of course, you are incapable of making free choices. We should no more condemn the embezzler than we should reward the firefighter who risks his life, since they are each merely products of environments that are ultimately responsible for their behavior.

   Psychological forces:  “I believe that people are governed by psychological forces, many of them unconscious, that cause them to think, feel, and act in certain ways.” Based on this point of view, the actions described previously are the direct result of deep psychological impulses that have been formed by people's earliest relationships and experiences. Although these people may think they are choosing to do the things, in reality, they are puppets manipulated by unseen psychological strings. The same is true for you. So when the coach sexually abused the children on his teams, he was not actually choosing this reprehensible course of action, he was impelled by psychological forces over which he had no control. Similarly, your behavior results from psychological motivations, often repressed, that form the basic structure of your personality. Your feelings of freedom are illusory.

   Social dynamics:  “I believe that we are social creatures that are greatly influenced by the people around us.” From this perspective, people's behavior results in large measure from the forces exerted by those around them. The need to conform to the prevailing norms, to be accepted by the groups to which you belong, to please those who are close to you, to obey those in positions of authority—these and other social needs determine your behavior and define who you are as an individual. For example, the violent actions of the initially peaceful demonstrators can be understood only by examining the dynamics of social interaction. Since the group as a whole is to blame, responsibility is removed from the individuals. In the same way, individuals who act illegally (or immorally) within an organization often seek to be exonerated on the grounds that they were merely acting as cogs in the machine, not independent agents. An extreme version of this occurred after World War II at the Nuremberg trials when many people accused of wartime atrocities explained that they were “only following orders.”