Welcome to the Nishma Insight Discussion Forum blog.
The NISHMA INSIGHT is our popular dvar Torah, distributed almost every week by e-mail, that touches upon an important concept in the Parsha, theme in a holiday or event in contemporary society.
Often, readers respond, via e-mail, with comments that initiate a further dialogue. Through this Discussion Forum, we now wish to open this dialogue to others. If you have a comment on the INSIGHT, we invite you place to your comments here; then we invite everyone to join the discussion.
(If you are not receiving the NISHMA INSIGHT, we invite you join our mailing/e-mail list through completing our sign-up form available at our website.)
I just want to clarify my concluding statement in the Insight. As argued in the Insight, external factors such as upbringing can affect one's independent free will -- and thus the just consequences this person should receive. His/her criminal act may not be his/her singular fault. The formal court system meting out pure justice must recognize this and must always as such further recognize how family and upbringing may make one not truly culpable. Limiting family involvement in court proceedings remind us of this truth. This, however, is not to say that what then occurs in the court is a reflection of the true evaluation of free will. Actual free will may still be absent. Just because family is absent in the actual proceedings of the court does not, of course, mean that what remains is the actions of the person's singular unadulterated free will. The person still is and was affected by his/her environment. Keeping family at a distance is but to be a reminder of what true free will is but that does not mean that keeping it as a distance in any specific case means that we are necessarily left with true free will
ReplyDeleteRBH