PHILOSOPHY

With such great minds and an awesome influence that seems boundless, how can there not be references to the works of Thomas Hobbes and Immanuel Kant. The Fundamental Principles in the Metaphysics of Morality is used by the minority dissenting opinion to reiterate the concepts of the intrinsic dignity of man. While the majority uses the literary work the Leviathan to support their own opinions. Transforming and uplifting the case of Gregg v. Georgia into an arena for a debate of Hobbian and Kant philosophies.

The majority claims that the death penalty serves two purposes, restitution and deterrence. Quoting the prior case of Fruman v. Georgia, that “The instinct for retribution is part of the nature of man and channeling that instinct in the administration of criminal justice serves an important purpose in promoting the stability of a society governed by laws. …

This is a classic statement that Hobbes himself could have possible uttered. For man is an awkward beast, driven by internal forces. The laws of nature. All men are equal and can perform equal acts of harm. Once harmed, he that who has been hurt will make attempts to revenge. Either in the name of just, duty, honor, or by any other word, it is an example of man conforming to his nature. To curb his nature by law is what the courts claim to be a stable society, Thomas Hobbes calls this a commonwealth under the Leviathan.

Deterrence, the power of the controlling entity to help guide and command those that its laws regulate against taking certain actions. Instilling fear within the hearts of man is a powerful and highly effective tool of leadership. As all men are equal this deterrence and creation of fear helps the Leviathan rule and have an edge over the citizens in the commonwealth.

Hobbes wants an ordered and just society. Where its people depend on the Leviathan for justice and protection. That is his reason for creating such commonwealth. His formula gives birth to a structured and organized society. According tot he courts a penalty such as that as death is a needed and essential law in an organized society that’s its citizens rely on legal process rather then self-help to vindicate their wrongs.

...

... middle of paper ...

...requires approval of retribution as a general justification for that punishment. Justice Marshall states in his dissenting opinion. It is the question whether retribution can provide moral justification for punishment. It simply defies belief to suggest that the death penalty is necessary to prevent the American people from taking the law into their own hands. Just as Justice Brennan has before, Marshall here fights retribution as cause for validity in the penalty of death. Using the same logic and formulas derived by Kant. Different examples and opinion but sill same results.

This case of Gregg v Georgia was an important trial to show us that we are forever redefining our standards and morals. Though our attitudes often changes they more often stay the same. This particular case holds this to some degree to be true. For may after their first publications, moral works here of Hobbes and Kant still help fuel some of the biggest debates in political, philosophical, and moral arenas. Each side, majority and the opposing dissent refer back to the mighty giants that with their little pens strokes brought down the mighty oaks.