PHI 2600 Section U02 Fall 2015 Introduction to Ethics
Third Paper Assignment
Student: Gretel Herrera- Martinez
Panther ID: 3339147
Topic: Does Igor Primoratz succeed in his argument that murderers deserve the dead penalty?
In this easy we are going to analyze the position of Igor Primoratz with respect to dead penalty. In my opinion the author successfully argument his position, that murders deserve the dead penalty. The author is in agreement with death penalty and his defense of death penalty considers, "a life for a life". The author defends capital punishment against several objections, as follows: a right to life objection, a contradiction objection, lack of proportionality, an unpreventable error objection, and a bias and prejudice …show more content…
In other cases the proportionality between the crime and the sentence can be satisfied by fines or prision. The value of human life is not commesurable with other values, and they are only one punishment for murders, and it is death. The death of the person who kill the other.
They are several arguments against the death penalty. One abolitionist argument stated that capital punishment is illegitimate because violates the right to life and this is a fundamental right of all human beings. As per the author who is not in agreement with this argument, considers that only we can claim any right if we respect the right that other people have. If I violate the rights of others, I lose the same rights.
Another argument from some opponents of capital punishment claim that a criminal law system that include this kind of punishment (dead penalty) is contradictory, in that it prohibits murder and at the same time provide for its …show more content…
Who claimed this position stated that any two human live are different, in several aspects, for example, age, heath mental and physical habilities. For that reason we can not consider equal both persons (victim and murder). Any two human lives are different in a several ways.
Another argument that has to do with this issue of proportionality between murder and capital punishment it is the fact that law considers a certain period of time to elapse between the passing of a death sentence and its execution. This could be a period of weeks or days or months and in some cases of years, and this could be constant mental anguish for the condemned. This could be disproportionately
The utilitarian theory justifies punishment on the bases of rehabilitation and deterrence. The purpose of a sentence is the rehabilitation, is to insert people that commit a crime into the society again. On the contrary the author consider that a person who intentionally kill someone rehabilitation just doesn't work. As per the author there is no solid proof has yet to demonstrate that rehabilitation programs succeed in lowering the rate of
Third Paper Assignment
Student: Gretel Herrera- Martinez
Panther ID: 3339147
Topic: Does Igor Primoratz succeed in his argument that murderers deserve the dead penalty?
In this easy we are going to analyze the position of Igor Primoratz with respect to dead penalty. In my opinion the author successfully argument his position, that murders deserve the dead penalty. The author is in agreement with death penalty and his defense of death penalty considers, "a life for a life". The author defends capital punishment against several objections, as follows: a right to life objection, a contradiction objection, lack of proportionality, an unpreventable error objection, and a bias and prejudice …show more content…
In other cases the proportionality between the crime and the sentence can be satisfied by fines or prision. The value of human life is not commesurable with other values, and they are only one punishment for murders, and it is death. The death of the person who kill the other.
They are several arguments against the death penalty. One abolitionist argument stated that capital punishment is illegitimate because violates the right to life and this is a fundamental right of all human beings. As per the author who is not in agreement with this argument, considers that only we can claim any right if we respect the right that other people have. If I violate the rights of others, I lose the same rights.
Another argument from some opponents of capital punishment claim that a criminal law system that include this kind of punishment (dead penalty) is contradictory, in that it prohibits murder and at the same time provide for its …show more content…
Who claimed this position stated that any two human live are different, in several aspects, for example, age, heath mental and physical habilities. For that reason we can not consider equal both persons (victim and murder). Any two human lives are different in a several ways.
Another argument that has to do with this issue of proportionality between murder and capital punishment it is the fact that law considers a certain period of time to elapse between the passing of a death sentence and its execution. This could be a period of weeks or days or months and in some cases of years, and this could be constant mental anguish for the condemned. This could be disproportionately
The utilitarian theory justifies punishment on the bases of rehabilitation and deterrence. The purpose of a sentence is the rehabilitation, is to insert people that commit a crime into the society again. On the contrary the author consider that a person who intentionally kill someone rehabilitation just doesn't work. As per the author there is no solid proof has yet to demonstrate that rehabilitation programs succeed in lowering the rate of