The Theft at the Arcade
Denzel is a 15-year-old student who is caught taking €45 from the till of a local arcade. He says his friends pressured him and that he panicked. A psychologist reports that Denzel has ADHD, poor impulse control, and a chaotic home life. His mother works two jobs and cannot supervise him in the evenings. The school's behaviour policy mandates automatic suspension for theft. The head teacher must decide whether to suspend Denzel, refer him to a restorative-justice programme, or do both. A teacher argues that Denzel must be held responsible, otherwise the school signals that wrongdoing has no consequences. Another teacher argues that punishment is unfair because Denzel's behaviour was shaped by factors he did not choose.
1. Using the debate between hard determinism and compatibilism, analyse whether Denzel can be morally responsible for the theft.
Read the worked answer
A hard determinist holds that if Denzel's action was caused by his upbringing, ADHD, and peer pressure, then he could not have done otherwise in the relevant sense, so he is not morally responsible. The causes may be complex, but they are still causes. A compatibilist replies that moral responsibility does not require the ability to act outside the causal chain. It requires that the action flowed from Denzel's own desires and intentions and that he was responsive to reasons, at least to some degree. On this view, his ADHD and background may reduce responsibility without eliminating it. The case does not settle the metaphysical debate, but it shows why the compatibilist position is practically useful: it allows proportionate blame while acknowledging mitigating factors. The hard determinist's point remains a warning against harsh punishment for traits Denzel did not choose.
2. Recommend what the head teacher should do. Justify your answer using at least two philosophical concepts and address the objection that your decision is too lenient.
Read the worked answer
The head teacher should combine a restorative-justice programme with a proportionate consequence, such as supervised community service at the arcade and a written apology. This reflects a compatibilist account of responsibility: Denzel is answerable for his action, but the response should target his future conduct rather than retribution. It also reflects the principle that punishment should be proportionate and that rehabilitation matters. The objection is that this is too lenient and undermines the school's clear rule. In reply, automatic suspension would likely increase Denzel's unsupervised evening time and fail to address the causes of the theft. A restorative process holds him accountable to the person harmed while teaching better decision-making. If he repeats the offence, firmer measures would be justified, but the first response should be educative rather than purely punitive.