depend upon the overall complexion of one’s mind, not on the metaphysics

I checked out the definition of metaphysics, which states as the philosophical study of being and knowing. Isn't the definition exactly the overall complexion of one’s mind?

Thus how to understand the meaning of "Judgments of responsibility, therefore, depend upon the overall complexion of one’s mind, not on the metaphysics of mental cause and effect"?
-----------------------

What does it really mean to take responsibility for an action? For instance,
yesterday I went to the market; as it turns out, I was fully clothed, did not steal anything, and did not buy anchovies. To say that I was responsible for my behavior is simply to say that what I did was sufficiently in keeping with my thoughts, intentions, beliefs, and desires to be considered an extension of them. If, on the other hand, I had found myself standing in the market naked, intent upon stealing as many tins of anchovies as I could carry, this behavior would be totally out of character; I would feel that I was not in my right mind, or that I was otherwise not responsible for my actions. Judgments of responsibility, therefore, depend upon the overall complexion of one’s mind, not on the metaphysics of mental cause and effect.

-Sam Harris

Piscean said:

The writer is suggesting that judging responsibility involves the whole mind, not just understanding mental cause and effect.

Click to expand...

I got it clearer, but not crystal clear.

Did he mean "mental cause and effect" is just one aspect, the physical structure of the brain is another?

I think you can compare his antithesis to Blaise Pascal's dichotomy between the geometric mind (logical, deductive), and mental finesse (intuition, weighing the relationship between the parts and the whole, relying on all of your memories and experience).

My understanding got improved.
But it still appears a bit elusive.

His decision on whether to steal the anchovies was not based on how easy or hard it would be. It was based on the fact that he's not a thief.

He should have just said that.

Charlie Bernstein said:

His decision on whether to steal the anchovies was not based on how easy or hard it would be. It was based on the fact that he's not a thief.

He should have just said that.

Click to expand...

I failed to get it well.

Does "the overall complexion of one’s mind" include the structure of his physical brain?

GoodTaste said:

I still don't get it.

Does "the overall complexion of one’s mind" include the structure of his physical brain?

Click to expand...

No. They physical structure of his brain is gray, lumpy, congealed oatmeal, just like your brain and my brain.

His mind's "complexion" is his attitudes, leanings, habits, character, feelings. He's saying he doesn't steal because it's not who he is, it's not how his mind works.