Is our fate determined?

2.4.2 Punishment in conjunction with a learning process We can also retain the sense in punishment in respect to the knowledge we glean from our information processing processes. The task of chastisement and also that of indemnification is to set a learning process in motion that leads to new preliminary information for future decisions. The importance of the information should then change with the result that in case of a repetition, a different decision will eventuate, one that does not contradict existing legalities and that does not lead to punishment and therefore to inconveniences. Making reparations can in many cases already fulfil this task. The learning process initiated by the punishment should, if at all possible, have a deterring effect before a trespass is committed because of the punishment that can be expected. If the trespass happens in spite of this, the execution of the punishment should lead to a change of heart, respectively the learning process. Those that trespass against laws in spite of the threat of punishment, in order to gain a personal advantage and to the detriment of others, are initially unreasonable. They do not realise that the strict adherence to the laws will eventually also benefit them. They do not appraise the committed evil that results in punishment, sufficiently or they hope that their deeds go undetected. Why is this so? The initiation of learning processes as a form of discipline and to promote new behaviours is always regarded as something uncomfortable. To re-think and to learn is arduous and it is in connection with a heightened level of energy-consumption from a physical point of view. The power consumption of a normally active brain is roughly 25 Watts and represent around a quarter of the whole power consumption of a person that in not engaged in heavy physical work. But every human being tries to deal very sparingly with the physical energy that is stored within the body because of an inherent powerful impulse, the impulse of convenience. This makes a lot of people completely close their eyes to new insights and they can often only be encouraged to re-think or to correct their inner attitude through external pressures, like for instance through criminal sentences, severe calamities or similar events. 2.4.3 Guilt After the sense in punishment has been dealt with, the prerequisites for punishment are to be investigated. The prerequisites for punishment in criminal law are: 1. Legal and concrete factual findings. 2. Illegality. 3. Guilt (that is to say that one has to be able to reproach an offender about doing something). A textbook of criminal law states this about the concept of guilt: “This means that one can reproach an offender about his (factual and illegal) behaviourism, that one can make him responsible for it. Just how this reproach can be psychologically and philosophically explained, whether the responsibility and particularly the ‘freedom of will’ are the presupposition for this or whether it is possible that it is on a deterministic basic principle, is very controversial. We cannot deal with this here; we must therefore dispense with a theoretical starting point.” 11 Based within the framework of the exposition presented here, guilt should be defined as follows: Guilt is the lack of timely and sufficient learning processes that make law-abiding behaviourism possible within society. When this deficiency and the evidence of a punishable action are found to be the case with an individual, it will be charged. This means that it must assume liability and bear the consequences, that is to say, be subjected to a learning process. 11 H. Engelhard , Einführung in das Strafrecht , Adolf Rausch Verlag, Heidelberg 1946, P 23.