In the beginning of this excerpt when Synge relates the anecdote of the Connaught man who killed his father, he suggests that this experience relates the “primitive feeling of these people…that a man will not do wrong unless he is under the influence of a passion which is as irresponsible as a storm on the sea…[and] they can see no reason why he should be dragged away and killed by the law.” While this seems to be an accurate assumption for the majority of cases, this is a potentially dangerous statement. The premise of this argument rests on the notion that the accused murderer feels remorse and is forever changed by their action. Yet this argument falls apart and would be frankly naive if the person who committed the crime is deranged and knowingly and unreservedly killed the person. If this were …show more content…
' The notion that punishment is needed as an example asserts that the punishment for murder, or the punishment any crime for that matter, should be employed as a deterrent and to inspire fear that will prevent others from fulfilling the said crime in the future. This illustrates a depressing and gloomy view of human nature, as being corrupt at its core and that fear remains the only thing that prevents us from committing evil acts. Rather, I believe that laws and the punishments associated with the infringement of laws are an agreement between a citizen and the society they live in about what is appropriate and agreeable behavior that protects the basic rights of all citizens and holds all citizens as equal in front of the law. Thus, if someone kills another person and the circumstances of the crime are not within the previously established laws, then the person should be held responsible regardless of whether one would kill that person if they could help it or
Guilt is the inevitable consequence that comes along after committing a crime and is a feeling that can paralyze and tear one’s soul away. However, it is evident that an individual’s feelings of guilt are linked to what they believe is right or wrong. In Robertson Davies Fifth Business, guilt is a principal theme in the novel and its effects have a major toll on the lives and mental state of many characters. Throughout the novel, it is apparent that the values and morals instilled within childhood shape an individual’s personality, as exhibited by the different ways the characters within the novel respond when faced with feelings of guilt. The literary elements Davies utilizes in the passage, from pages fifteen to sixteen, introduce the theme of guilt and display the contrast in how
Everybody alive has experienced the feeling of guilt, or at least will at some point. Usually, this feeling is quite healthy for our consciousness, helping us distinguish between what is right and wrong by our own moral principles and values. However, guilt holds quite a power to really disturb the mind. This theme of the relationship between guilt and sanity is common throughout literature, and patterns to how this is expressed through texts are very evident. Four texts which I will discuss this theme through is Macbeth by William Shakespeare, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, The Tell-Tale Heart by Edgar Allan Poe, and The Animals’ version of Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood.
Guilt is a very potent emotion that an individual always feels in relation to others and has its genesis in the wrong done by some person to others. The two prominent works of literature that are Macbeth and The Kite Runner, though contrived centuries apart, revolve around an unremitting feeling of guilt felt by the central characters that are Macbeth and Amir, and the ordeal they had to go through owing to the psychological and practical consequences of that guilt. In the Shakespearian tragedy Macbeth, though, manages to murder the Scottish king Duncan to actualize the prophecy of the three witches, yet the guilt emanating from such nefarious acts and intentions continues to foreshadow Macbeth’s life throughout the plot. The very moment Macbeth approaches Lady Macbeth with hands dipped in the blood of Duncan, his deep seated guilt oozes forth as he says, “Methought I heard a voice cry ‘Sleep no more;/Macbeth does murder sleep (2.2.45-46)”. Thereby, from this moment onwards, Macbeth is shown to be strongly stung by an unrelenting and continually nagging sense of guilt that makes him engage in strange and suspicion generating acts and manners.
In Harry Mulisch’s novel The Assault, the author not only informs society of the variance in perception of good and evil, but also provides evidence on how important it is for an innocent person experiencing guilt to come to terms with their personal past. First, Mulisch uses the characters Takes, Coster, and Ploeg to express the differences in perspective on the night of the assault. Then he uses Anton to express how one cannot hide from the past because of their guilt. Both of these lessons are important to Mulisch and worth sharing with his readers.
The capital punishment has been cited as a reasonable sentence by those who advocate for retribution. This is essentially when it comes to justice so that people take full responsibility for their individual actions. Studies have proved that the decision to take away life of a person because they committed a certain crime serves to perpetuate the crime in question. It also serves to enhance the progress of organized and violent crime. It has been noted that various flaws in the justice system has led to the wrong conviction of innocent people. On the other hand, the guilty have also been set free, and a plethora of several cases has come up when a critical look at the capital punishment has been undertaken. Killers hardly kill their victims deliberately, but they probably act on anger, passion, or impulsively. In this regard, it is not proper to convict them exclusively without
3) Though the claim that death penalty serves as a deterrent is valid, it is controversial in its soundness. It is sound that criminals fear the death penalty. Indeed, death penalty is fearful, as it is irrevocable and takes away the life and future of the criminal sentenced to it. However, the evidences supporting the second premise that is the core function of the claim for the deterrence argument is too excessive. In the letter, the author first presents his own experience to prove that the fear of death penalty deters offenders from carrying a gun. However, using an experience as a proof for deterrence for such a complex and serious punishment as the death penalty is extreme. While supporters of the author may respond with the author’s credibility as a police officer for thirty years, personal experience and insight can’t be extrapolated with possibilities of bias...
Eliminating the death penalty as a method of punishment will only allow criminals to wreak havoc and chaotic in our community without the fear of death. When a person commits a crime, they are disrupting the order in the community. Justice help restore the disruption of that order. The Death penalty restore social order and give the states authority to maximized retribution for the victims. When the state does not have the authority to maximum retribution, the public may put the law in their own hands. Although, execution may be cruel and inhumane, it is nothing compared to the fate of many victims in the hand of the murderers. The purpose of the death penalty is to provide retribution for the victims and their families. However, retribution is not revenge. “Vengeance signifies inflicting harm on the offender out of anger because of what he has done. Retribution is the rationally supported theory that the criminal deserves a punishment fitting the gravity of his crime” (Pojman, 2004).
In conclusion, our justice system is full of flaws and proves to show why the death penalty should be abolished. The reasons for it to be abolished include: financials cost, long drawn out process, more effective sentencing styles, the conviction and execution of an innocent person and the violation of the “cruel and unusual” punishment clause in the Bill of Rights. While the death penalty may seem like the right thing to do under the philosophy of “Eye for Eye”, it only encourages the ongoing process of criminal behavior. Our criminal justice system is blurred and sometimes ineffective when it comes to certain cases. Moreover, justice can be bought rather served.
This essay will discuss the various views regarding the death penalty and its current status in the United States. It can be said that almost all of us are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye” and for most people that is how the death penalty is viewed. In most people’s eyes, if a person is convicted without a doubt of murdering someone, it is believed that he/she should pay for that crime with their own life. However, there are some people who believe that enforcing the death penalty makes society look just as guilty as the convicted. Still, the death penalty diminishes the possibility of a convicted murderer to achieve the freedom needed to commit a crime again; it can also be seen as a violation of the convicted person’s rights going against the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
One of the basic assumptions underlying any detective novel is a sense of social order. The novelist assumes that the reader agrees that killing people is wrong; it does not matter if the victims are exemplary citizens or odious individuals, it is the mere act of snuffing out another’s life that is against the social order. In P.D. James’ A Mind To Murder, Nurse Marion Bolam’s murder of her stuffy and self-righteous cousin Enid illustrates a situation where the nurse and her invalid mother had suffered from her cousin’s stinginess; James gives us a clear look at the murderer’s fear that if Enid had been given time to change her will as she had threatened to do, the Marion and her mother would never get the money to which they considered themselves entitled. However, James urges us to understand, this does not matter. Murder, for whatever reason it is committed, is still murder, and it is always wrong.
There are many ways to decide what makes a man guilty. In an ethical sense, there is more to guilt than just committing the crime. In Charles Brockden Browns’ Wieland, the reader is presented with a moral dilemma: is Theodore Wieland guilty of murdering his wife and children, even though he claims that the command came from God, or is Carwin guilty because of his history of using persuasive voices, even though his role in the Wieland family’s murder is questionable? To answer these questions, one must consider what determines guilt, such as responsibility, motives, consequences, and the act itself. No matter which view is taken on what determines a man’s guilt, it can be concluded that Wieland bears the fault in the murder of Catharine Wieland and her children.
Human nature is a conglomerate perception which is the dominant liable expressed in the short story of “A Tell-Tale Heart”. Directly related, Edgar Allan Poe displays the ramifications of guilt and how it can consume oneself, as well as disclosing the nature of human defense mechanisms, all the while continuing on with displaying the labyrinth of passion and fears of humans which make a blind appearance throughout the story. A guilty conscience of one’s self is a pertinent facet of human nature that Edgar Allan Poe continually stresses throughout the story. The emotion that causes a person to choose right from wrong, good over bad is guilt, which consequently is one of the most ethically moral and methodically powerful emotion known to human nature. Throughout the story, Edgar Allan Poe displays the narrator to be rather complacent and pompous, however, the narrator establishes what one could define as apprehension and remorse after committing murder of an innocent man. It is to believe that the narrator will never confess but as his heightened senses blur the lines between real and ...
Another factor resulting in the inevitability of Macbeth’s evil was his Guilty conscience. Macbeth knows his actions are wrong a...
If we are to be truly innocent and humble beings, we must recognize our own innate guilt as human and accept it. If we do not, we will constantly be obsessed by our “state of apparent acquittals”. Kafka, Franz. A. The Trial. Trans.
Punishment has been in existence since the early colonial period and has continued throughout history as a method used to deter criminals from committing criminal acts. Philosophers believe that punishment is a necessity in today’s modern society as it is a worldwide response to crime and violence. Friedrich Nietzche’s book “Punishment and Rehabilitation” reiterates that “punishment makes us into who we are; it creates in us a sense of responsibility and the ability to take and release our social obligations” (Blue, Naden, 2001). Immanuel Kant believes that if an individual commits a crime then punishment should be inflicted upon that individual for the crime committed. Cesare Beccaria, also believes that if there is a breach of the law by individuals then that individual should be punished accordingly.