Nathanson is quick to condemn the Equal Punishment Principle because, for one reason, it does not lead to a “measure of moral desert” (as cited in Timmons, 2016, p. 539). Nathanson also condemns the Equal Punishment Principle because it does not result in a sufficient scale for knowing suitable amounts of retribution (as cited in Timmons, 2016). Nathanson elaborates on the second problem, stating that it is ethically heinous to make an individual pay for his or her actions by making them suffer the same way they made another individual or individuals suffer (as cited in Timmons, 2016). For example, Nathanson states that the principle could mean “we rape rapists” (as cited in Timmons, 2016, p. 539).
Ethical egoism talks about the ethicality of something corresponding to whether the effects of certain behavior are enjoyable to every person but the individual participating in that behavior (Fieser, n.d.). While the Equal Punishment Principle’s …show more content…
Nathanson continues with the notion that, ultimately, the Equal Punishment Principle does not give insight as to what should happen to someone who broke the law nor does the principle give insight as to what the most appropriate course of action should be (as cited in Timmons, 2016). However, the Equal Punishment Principle is still appealing, as Nathanson points out because it corresponds directly to the notion that the treatment of an individual is connected to his or her behavior (as cited in Timmons, 2016). Also, according to Nathanson, the principle adheres to an ethical criterion and does not involve outside entities (as cited in Timmons, 2016). Finally, the principle, as Nathanson emphasizes, instructs how to make an individual answer for their crimes while demonstrating how these ideas could be implemented in legal systems (as cited in Timmons,
Ethical egoism talks about the ethicality of something corresponding to whether the effects of certain behavior are enjoyable to every person but the individual participating in that behavior (Fieser, n.d.). While the Equal Punishment Principle’s …show more content…
Nathanson continues with the notion that, ultimately, the Equal Punishment Principle does not give insight as to what should happen to someone who broke the law nor does the principle give insight as to what the most appropriate course of action should be (as cited in Timmons, 2016). However, the Equal Punishment Principle is still appealing, as Nathanson points out because it corresponds directly to the notion that the treatment of an individual is connected to his or her behavior (as cited in Timmons, 2016). Also, according to Nathanson, the principle adheres to an ethical criterion and does not involve outside entities (as cited in Timmons, 2016). Finally, the principle, as Nathanson emphasizes, instructs how to make an individual answer for their crimes while demonstrating how these ideas could be implemented in legal systems (as cited in Timmons,