3-2 Milestone One Dilemma and Background
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
212
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by ChefWallaby4001
1
3-2 Milestone One Dilemma and Background
Kristi South
Southern New Hampshire University
PHL-212-H5303 Introduction to Ethics
Dr. Diane O’Leary
May 21, 2023
2
Many questions about the death penalty must be evaluated when considering the ethical dilemmas that may arise. Does the death penalty cause more harm than good? The family members cannot help the actions of their loved one, and now they must go through the mental anguish and grieving process of losing someone dear to them. However, does someone receiving the death penalty positively affect the victim’s family? The referenced article states, “
One University of Minnesota study found that just 2.5% of co-victims reported achieving closure as a result of capital punishment, while 20.1% said the execution did not help them heal.” This is an overwhelming percentage of co-victims that did not have positive impacts when executing the individual responsible.
How many individuals are wrongfully convicted and executed via the death penalty? We cannot bring someone back to life if the evidence is later found proving their innocence, but we can release them from prison for wrongful convictions.
According to ACLU’s article “The Case Against the Death Penalty,” “Innocent people are too often sentenced to death.
Since 1973, over 156 people have been released from death row in 26 states because of innocence. Nationally, at least one person is exonerated for every ten executed.” Another question stated in the article “Capital Punishment” is, “
The central philosophic question about capital punishment is one of moral justification:
on what grounds, if any, is the state’s deliberate killing of identified offenders a morally justifiable response to voluntary criminal conduct, even the most serious of crimes, such as murder?” The article states, “It carries
negative effects on people other than the inmate, he writes, “undermine the principle that the criminal justice system punishes only the guilty and never the innocent. The death penalty affects
everyone who knows, cares for, or works with the death row inmate.” This links negative impacts to all parties involved, including families and the individuals required to execute those on death row. Another issue from the opposing viewpoint would be, “If the death penalty is
3
abolished, are there ethical problems with imprisoning a person for his or her natural life?” We must consider many factors when evaluating if capital punishment carries more negative impacts
than positive for all individuals involved. I chose the Death Penalty as my topic as it has been an ethical dilemma of great interest to me for years, yet I have never made it to a decision of right and wrong. I am personally motivated by this topic as I have been summoned for jury duty on several cases, one being of a more severe nature that required me to decide on a man’s life. Once you're staring something of that magnitude in the face, it becomes more daunting, and the severe nature provides you with a new, deeper perspective.
The utilitarian theory applies when evaluating the ethical dilemmas associated with capital punishment due to the potential effects on all individuals involved. The web text in “Consider Ethics” states, “Bentham’s classical utilitarian theory counsels that calculating the right act means calculating which act would produce the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for all involved, and pleasure and pain are certain feelings. Thus, utilitarians typically insist on weighing feelings and the goodness or badness of an act based on what feelings result from that act.” (Waller, 2019) When deciding on capital punishment, we must weigh the negative and positive impacts for everyone, including the individual that has done something to warrant execution potentially. Many philosophical theories relate to capital punishment depending on how you are involved with the individual on death row. However, Kant’s theory would be more relevant to all parties involved. Considering Ethics states, “Kant believes that reason can do much more than merely guide in accomplishing our purposes. According to Kant, reason can discover eternal, absolute ethical principles, principles of universal ethical truth that can be known with rational
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
certainty” This means we should use ethical principles as well as rational reasoning when about someone’s life. From the other perspective, “Kant’s categorical Imperative theory, always act in such a way that you could will that your actions should be a universal law. This is hardly a new and surprising ethical principle. It is quite similar to what is often called “the golden rule”: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” (Walla, 2019) This philosophical theory is stating the death penalty is ethical for someone who has committed murder. We have many different concepts to evaluate when considering the morality of capital punishment and if the positive effects outweigh the adverse effects on everyone involved.
5
REFERENCES
Death penalty information center
. Death Penalty Information Center. (2021, February 18). Retrieved May 6, 2023, from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/ Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. (n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2023, from https://iep.utm.edu/death-penalty-capital-punishment/ The case against the death penalty
. American Civil Liberties Union. (2012, August 5). https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty Waller, B. N. (20190712). Consider Ethics, 4th Edition. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from
vbk://9780134650838