Search

At the core of many legal cases involving cultural background is the question of an individual's freedom to act contrary to the norms of his or her culture. Particularly in criminal cases the question is: Shall the individual, raised in a given culture, be seen as possessing unrestricted free will? Alternatively, are individuals essentially limited in their choices by their culture or forced to choose between cultural attachment and cultural alienation? When experts testify as to cultural context, what theories of free will versus cultural constraint do they exemplify? How do anthropologists' theories square with those of psychologists, geneticists, or neuroscientists addressing the same issues? In the absence of expert guidance, what assumptions do courts bring to bear on the relation of culture to free will? By looking at the approaches anthropologists have taken to these questions, we can initiate a much-needed conversation about the dilemma an expert faces in court when confronted with issues of free will. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]