Different Ethical Perspectives on Capital Punishment

624 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essay on the justification of capital punishment

Utilitarianism, Deontology, and Capital Punishment
Capital punishment can be morally justified under certain circumstances. 1. Because an eye for an eye is seemingly the way to go in terms of determining punishments for criminals. While most crimes can be punished with certain prison times, the taking of a human life is directly depriving an individual of their right to live and of any other value they can experience in life. With some thought the best way to serve a murder, serial killer, or committee of human atrocities would be through the ultimate deprivation of existence we call death, or at least the ultimate deprivation one can experience while alive. 2. The state would be accredited to the execution of the individual, while creating …show more content…

More specifically following rules over the old idea of “the ends justifies the means” that is utilitarianism. Kant, in the case of capital punishment, believed that eye for an eye was the best form of punishment for criminals. When an innocent life is taken the murderer gives up their right to life and becomes deserving of death. To deprive murderers of their life was the most just action, so they can no longer cause harm to anyone else. Especially in the case that they were to be released from prison, having that humanity stripped away from them when they first murdered. Making them prone to have repeated offenses. Another justification from retributivism is that the value of a human life and it's being stolen away is exceedingly uncomparable to any punishment that can be received in life [This is the case] “simply because we have to be alive if we are to realize and experience any other values at all, there is nothing equivalent to the murderous destruction of a human life except the destruction of the life of the murderer.” (Primoratz 387) Without the destruction of the murderer’s life they are still able to retain some value in life no matter how bad the conditions of their new found prison life may

Show More
Related

  • Capital Punishment

    1397 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many positions can be defended when debating the issue of capital punishment. In Jonathan Glover's essay "Executions," he maintains that there are three views that a person may have in regard to capital punishment: the retributivist, the absolutist, and the utilitarian. Although Glover recognizes that both statistical and intuitive evidence cannot validate the benefits of capital punishment, he can be considered a utilitarian because he believes that social usefulness is the only way to justify it. Martin Perlmutter on the other hand, maintains the retributivist view of capital punishment, which states that a murderer deserves to be punished because of a conscious decision to break the law with knowledge of the consequences. He even goes as far to claim that just as a winner of a contest has a right to a prize, a murderer has a right to be executed. Despite the fact that retributivism is not a position that I maintain, I agree with Perlmutter in his claim that social utility cannot be used to settle the debate about capital punishment. At the same time, I do not believe that retributivism justifies the death penalty either.

    Read More

  • In Cold Blood Death Penalty Essay

    1009 Words  | 3 Pages

    Is it justifiable to inflict the death penalty on individuals who have committed murder? As majority would have it, yes. There are many arguments in favor of capital punishment. Some of these include taking a murderer out of this world once and for all, and saving money that would be spent on them if they were given a life sentence, as well as the majority rule of citizens of the United States wishing it to stay. In Truman Capote’s nonfiction novel, In Cold Blood, Dick and Perry were assigned the death penalty for the cruel murders of four members of the Clutter family in a small town in Kansas. Not only did this pair of men deserve what they got, but it is also better for the state that they were executed.

    Read More

  • Igor Primoratz's Categotiation Argument

    867 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the argument for abolishing or retention of the death penalty, Igor Primoratz took the Pro-retributivism stand for the retention of the death penalty. In Primoratz’s “A Life for A Life,” he argues against the abolitionists utilitarianism stand on the issue of the death penalty. Primoratz argues on the premises that- (a) “Punishment is morally Justified insofar as it is meted out as retribution for offense committed” (Primoratz 356.) (b) Death is the only proportional punishment for murder; (c) Death is the only effective deterrence measure for murder. In response to Primoratz choice to use Kant’s Retributivism argument as the basis for his pro-retention argument for the death penalty, similarly Kant’s Categorical Imperative will be used as a measuring stick to validate or refute Primoratz’s argument for the retention of the death penalty.

    Read More

  • Death Penalty: Deontological And Teleological Arguments

    238 Words  | 1 Pages

    The death penalty in American society using the deontological and teleological argument is in the deontological perspective, believes that the death penalty is a morally appropriate punishment and also views capital punishment as being immoral. In deontological argument, it will place moral emphasis on the intentions of his or her actions. The deontological ethics does not focus on the actual consequences. A deontological defense of punishment is likely to be a retributive justification. According to Kant, he believes in the retributive punishment, which is known as the idea of “an eye for an eye”, meaning the law says that we should punish someone not because what they did was wrong, but to just punish them for the sake of punishing.

    Read More

  • Kant Capital Punishment

    1888 Words  | 4 Pages

    When viewing capital punishment in light of retributive justice, Kant's "Respect for Persons" ethics can be applied in order to uphold the retentionist argument. Capital punishment continues to be a growing controversial topic in society and is an important ethical dilemma to discuss. It can most prominently be supported by Kant's "Respect for Persons" ethics which when applied to the practice of capital punishment implies that it is morally acceptable in the sense that it gives people what they deserve. Additionally, despite consistent arguments by those who oppose capital punishment, the death penalty appears to be the most practical practice of punishment granted certain conditions.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Utilitarianism

    699 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout human history, the way in which we define what is right and wrong has gone through many different transformations. The way we treat our fellow human beings has been altered by war, propaganda, racism and cultural differences. The division of land and power in the middle ages, the crusades, women’s suffrage and slavery are all derived from the ethics of particular cultures and perspectives. By looking at the ethics of previous eras and cultures, I hope to develop a particular ethical standpoint that is fair to all people of all cultures. For me, this is the standpoint that the end justifies the means, otherwise known as utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • The Need for Capital Punishment in America

    1160 Words  | 3 Pages

    The moral reality in an argument for capital punishment is that they know the difference between the death penalty and what happens when it is actually put into place from the court of law. In the United States there are more people sitting in prison on death row than actually being executed at time of sentence. When the death penalty is not carried out, then families of the murdered victim recognize the value of the victim’s life is insignificant and the person that has committed the crime has the greater life of being able to continue living while in prison on death row. Many people argue for the death penalty with the case that is someone commits a violent crime, they should be put to death. Should anyone argue that if you take a human life, they will be able to live in prison and serve time and live, not to die by lethal injection or any of the other forms of capital punishment immediately? The argument for anyone in prison to not be punished and put to death is a crime within itself.

    Read More

  • The Unjust Reality of Capital Punishment

    1241 Words  | 3 Pages

    While one person lays with their wrists circumscribed to the worn leather of the gurney, another person holds two skin-piercing needles. The individual holding the needles is an inexperienced technician who obtains permission from the United States federal government to murder people. One needle is held as a precaution in case the pain is too visible to the viewers. Another dagger filled with a lethal dosage of chemicals is inserted into the vein that causes the person to stop breathing. When the cry of the heart rate monitor becomes monotone, the corrupt procedure is complete. Lying in the chair is a corpse when moments ago it was an individual who made one fatal mistake that will never get the chance to redeem (Ecenbarger). Although some people believe that the death

    Read More

  • In Support of Capital Punishment

    483 Words  | 1 Pages

    I believe that capital punishment is a justifiable means of punishment for the most heinous crimes. In addition, the means of execution should not matter if the basic principle behind this form of justice can be justified by the specific crime. This is why my opinion is that any form of capital punishment in effect in the United States today is warranted and fair.

    Read More

  • The Ethics of Capital Punishment

    1503 Words  | 4 Pages

    Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.

    Read More

  • Killing Is Never Justifies

    1574 Words  | 4 Pages

    Capital punishment, by definition, is the legal killing of an individual. Now, how someone could be killed legally when murder is universally recognized as a violent and serious crime. It is irrevocable, meaning that once an inhabitant of death row pays the ultimate price. The death penalty is corporal punishment in its most severe form and is considered to be the ultimate form of retribution for those who have committed society's most heinous crimes, including rape and murder. Ultimately, Capital punishment is wrong due to the likelihood of error, the unjust racial allocation, and the violation of constitutional rights. However, many people believe that capital punishment is morally correct and preserves human dignity.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism in Crime and Punishment

    1878 Words  | 4 Pages

    would reject even the notion of deliberating about the act of murder in such a

    Read More

  • Capital Punishment: Is It Right or Wrong?

    2333 Words  | 5 Pages

    Capital Punishment is a controversial topic discussed in today's society. Capital punishment is often not as harsh in other countries as we may call harsh in our country. There is a heated debate on whether states should be able to kill other humans or not. But if we shall consider that other countries often have more deadly death penalties than we do. People that are in favor of the death penalty say that it saves money by not paying for housing in a maximum prison but what about our smaller countries that abide by the rule of the capital punishment. If one were to look at the issues behind capital punishment in an anthropological prospective than one would see that in some cases no one would assume that capital punishment here in the U.S. is bad. Now those opposed say that it is against the constitution, and is cruel and unusual punishment for humans to be put to his or her death. I believe that the death penalty is against the constitution and is cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is cruel because you cannot punish anyone worse than by killing them. It is an unusual punishment because it does not happen very often and it should not happen at all. Therefore, I think that capital punishment should be abolished, everywhere.

    Read More

  • In Favor for the Death Penalty

    1163 Words  | 3 Pages

    Though the death penalty is considered barbaric, it is not. With those who have ones that have died viciously to the ones who died young there is such a thing as karma. The death penalty allows those people who committed the crime to be punished equally. Therefore, I agree with the reason for having the death penalty. It is only fair that the criminal be punished for his wrong doings. The bible does say, “An eye for an eye.” When there is equal punishment and safety it makes people worry less. It allows them to live out their lives in peace, and to not look back on something bad that has happened to them.

    Read More

  • Free Capital Punishment Essays - Is the Death Penalty Just? Argumentative Persuasive Essays

    1625 Words  | 4 Pages

    Capital punishment is therefor necessary but there are opponents who think that it is barbaric. Hugo Adam Bedau, a professor of philosophy at Tufts University, says this about capital punishment " the death penalty is uncivilized in theory and has no place in a civilized society." (2) This is true but we do not live in a civilized society if we did there would be no crime thus the death penalty would be out of date. But in this uncivilized society that we live in I say let the punishment fit the crime, an eye for an eye. Bedau also said that " Criminals no doubt deserve to be punished, and punished with severity appropriate to their culpability and the harm they have caused to the innocent." (2) This I strongly agree with and feel that Bedau is beginning to see the need for capital punishment.

    Read More

More about Different Ethical Perspectives on Capital Punishment

Open Document