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
"But for the grace of God," said the tinker of Elstow--but for the
graces of environment, say we--there, in the hangman's cart, in the
felon's jacket, in the dunce's cap, in the beggar's rags, in the
degradation of the drunkard or the misery of the degenerate weed of the
slums--go We.
CHAPTER SEVEN--HOW HEREDITY AND ENVIRONMENT WORK
THERE are many who have some understanding of heredity and of
environment when taken separately who fail to realise their effects upon
each other.
The common cause of the stumbling is easy to remove.
It is often said that two men are differently affected by the same
environment, or what seems to be the same environment, and that
therefore there must be some power in men to "overcome" their
environment.
I have dealt with this argument already, showing that the contest
between a man and his environment is really a contest between heredity
and environment, and may be compared to the effort of a man to swim
against a stream.
A given environment will affect two different men differently because
their heredity is different.
But remembering that we are born without any knowledge, and that we are
born not with intellect nor conscience, but only with the rudiments
of such, it must be insisted that the hereditary power to resist
environment is very limited. So much so that we may amend our figure of
the swimmer and the stream, and say that no man, howsoever strong and
brave, could swim against a stream unless he had learnt to swim.
And the learning to swim is environment, and works against the contrary
environment, typified by the stream.
Let us take the case of two children. One has bad and one good heredity.
One is a healthy baby, born of moral stock. The other is a degenerate,
born of immoral stock. We will call the healthy baby Dick, and the
degenerate baby Harry.
They are taken at birth into an environment of theft, drunkenness, and
vice. They are taught to lie, to steal, and to drink. They never hear
any good, never see a good example.
Harry, the degenerate, will take to evil as a duck to water. Of that, I
think, there is no question. But what of Dick, the healthy baby?
Dick is born without knowledge. He is also born with undeveloped
propensities. He will learn evil. His propensities will be trained
to evil. How is he to "overcome his environment and become good"? He
_cannot_. What will happen in Dick's case is that he will become a
different kind of criminal--a stronger and cleverer criminal than Harry.
But, I hear some one say, "we know that children, born of thieves and
sots, and reared in bad surroundings, have turned out honest and sober
men." And the inference is that they rose superior to their environment.
But that inference is erroneous. The _fact_ is that these children were
saved by some _good_ environment, acting against the bad.
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