Capital Punishment: James, Ayer, And Strawson

694 Words2 Pages

Capital punishment is a very touchy subject for most. Do you believe someone should have their life taken from them for doing a wrong act? Is it moral or not? I’m going to explain to you how I feel the three philosophers, James, Ayer, and Strawson, would view capital punishment. For James, emotions play an important role in decision making. James believes your emotions are what set you apart from other people. No one is going to have the exact same views as you, which makes you unique. “Moral questions immediately present themselves as questions whose solution cannot wait for a sensible proof” (James, 117). What this quote basically means is when you faced with a hard decision that needs an immediate answer, your emotions will guide you to the decision you make. Because of this I feel if James was faced with weather capital punishment is right or wrong he would agree with it. If someone kills another person, James would say you would immediately feel that that person should die himself based on your emotions. Seeing James relies on emotions, people’s decision regarding capital punishment could be different which can make his ideas not as clear. Where as Ayer believes there it a right and a wrong to everything and people decision wont vary …show more content…

I think that he would not be in favor for capital punishment because he would think that killing someone is wrong there for putting someone to death for killing someone else would be wrong no matter what the emotion involved were. Ayer was an analytic philosopher so he would be more concerned to what you meant by capital punishment than what your emotions about the issue were. Ayer would be more concerned with what is right and wrong, opposed to what you feel is right and wrong. There are no grey areas with Ayer. Killing someone and stealing someone’s lunch money would all be the same in Ayers eyes because it is

Open Document