THE DANGERS OF DUALISM: IMpLIcATIONS OF THE MULTIpLE DEcISION-MAkING SySTEM THEORy FOR FREE WILL AND RESpONSIbILITy

Recent work on decision-making suggests that we are a conglomeration of multiple decision-making information-processing systems. In this paper, I address consequences of this work on decision-making processes for three philosophical conceptualizations that can be categorized as forms of dualism. 1. A rejection of Cartesian dualism. Although most scientists reject the existence of a separate non-physical being, the importance of this still has not been fully appreciated in many other fields, such as legal or philosophical scholarship. 1 The Dangers of Dualism 2. A rejection of the software analogy. Many researchers still argue that we are software running on neural hardware. I will argue that this is a modern form of dualism and that this hypothesis is not compatible with the data. 3. A rejection of Augustinian dualism. Many researchers identify human cognition with only one of the multiple decision-making systems, which leads to concepts such as emotion made me do it. I will argue that this is a poor description of the human individual. All three of these errors are still used in making decisions in current law and legal scholarship. As scientific results begin to undercut these dualist interpretations, it becomes dangerously easy to reject intention, free will, and responsibility. I argue that taking a more realistic perspective on human decision-making will provide a more reasonable basis for legal decisions.