In 1985, The New Republic released Edward I. Koch’s essay entitled “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life” to the public. This essay 's purpose was to sway readers towards a new perspective that affirms the morality and validity of capital punishment. While the article seems effective at first glance, upon further inspection the holes in its message start to become clear. For this very reason, Koch’s essay is a convincing article, yet riddled with logical fallacies and self-contradictions.
Throughout his article, Koch intertwines emotional stories with the refinement of the many arguments people who oppose the death penalty may have. He begins with two reports of convicted felons, Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw, and their final words before being put to death. Next, he establishes the time and thought he has put into his decision and the credibility with which he, mayor of New York, …show more content…
During his rebuttal of the biblical commandment “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder,” Koch portrays the analysis of this passage by referencing “thinkers of nineteenth century” (604). Those mentioned are as follows: Kant, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Montesquieu, Mill, and Bentham. Now, there is one rather major issue here. These are not nineteenth century thinkers. With the exception of Mill and Bentham, the other five philosophers are from before the nineteenth century, some even from as early at the 1600s. This created a huge hole in Koch’s argument. How is the reader supposed to agree with what he is saying if even his historical facts are incorrect. This implies that Koch did not thoroughly research the philosophers that he is pulling research from. If this is true, what could someone then say about the rest of his paper. The implications of this take away much of Koch’s reliability as a writer and the credibility of his case for capital
Throughout his article, Koch intertwines emotional stories with the refinement of the many arguments people who oppose the death penalty may have. He begins with two reports of convicted felons, Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw, and their final words before being put to death. Next, he establishes the time and thought he has put into his decision and the credibility with which he, mayor of New York, …show more content…
During his rebuttal of the biblical commandment “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder,” Koch portrays the analysis of this passage by referencing “thinkers of nineteenth century” (604). Those mentioned are as follows: Kant, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Montesquieu, Mill, and Bentham. Now, there is one rather major issue here. These are not nineteenth century thinkers. With the exception of Mill and Bentham, the other five philosophers are from before the nineteenth century, some even from as early at the 1600s. This created a huge hole in Koch’s argument. How is the reader supposed to agree with what he is saying if even his historical facts are incorrect. This implies that Koch did not thoroughly research the philosophers that he is pulling research from. If this is true, what could someone then say about the rest of his paper. The implications of this take away much of Koch’s reliability as a writer and the credibility of his case for capital