Not Guilty: A Defence of the Bottom DogBlatchford, Robert
Philosophy
Not Guilty: A Defence of the Bottom Dog
Blatchford, Robert
Criminals; Free will and determinism
It is with moral evils as with physical evils. When an epidemic of fever
or smallpox comes upon us we do not punish the sick, nor blame them.
But we isolate the sick, and we attack the _cause_ of the sickness, by
attending to matters of hygiene and sanitation. That is how we ought to
deal with moral sickness.
Men do not live badly because they are "wicked," but because they are
ignorant. The remedy lies in the study and adoption of the laws of the
science of human life.
If we are to have a moral people we must first of all have a healthy
people. If the working classes are to be made sober and pure and wise,
the other classes must be made honest, and to be made honest they must
be taught what honesty is.
But the Christian cannot teach what honesty is because he does not
know. He cannot attack the causes of vice and crime, because he does not
understand that vice and crime are caused. He has been taught that men
do wrong because they will not do right, and that they can do right if
they will.
The Christian blames the criminal, and punishes him, because the
Christian believes that the criminal has a "free will."
But we should not blame nor punish the criminal, because we know that
he is a victim of heredity and environment. So we should restrain the
criminal, and try to reform him; and we should attack the environment
which made him a criminal, and is still making more criminals, and we
should try to alter that environment, and so prevent the making of more
criminals.
For the hardened criminal, restraint may be necessary. It may be
impossible to reform him. It may be too late.
But it is not too late to save millions of innocent children from a like
disaster and disgrace. It is not too late to prevent evil in the future,
though we cannot atone for the evil wrought in the past.
We know, and the Christian knows, that where a murderer destroys one
life society destroys thousands. We know that all through our pursy
civilisation, in all the fine cities of our wealth, our culture, and our
boastful piety, the ruin of children, the production of monsters, the
desecration of human souls, is going steadily and ruthlessly on. We know
this, and the Christian knows this; but we propose to prevent it, to
stop it, by striking at the root _cause_: the Christian hopes to check
it by lopping off here and there one of the fruits.
That is one reason why I claim that Humanism is a better religion than
Christianity; that is one reason why I claim that Christianity is a
failure.
What is the cause of crime? The Christian does not know. What is the
cause of ignorance? The Christian does not know. What is the cause of
poverty? The Christian does not know.
For ages the Christians trusted to religion to rid them of pestilence.
Science taught them to _prevent_ pestilence. Now they trust to religion
to rid the world of vice and crime. It is the same old error. Science
has shown us the causes of vice and crime: science teaches us that we
must attack the causes.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account