Equal Punishment Principle Nathanson Analysis

Improved Essays
Stephen Nathanson criticizes the Equal Punishment Principle used to justify the death penalty. He believes that the idea of equal punishment, which is backed by common sense and tradition, has many flaws that need to be considered (Timmons, 2007, pg. 541). Nathanson explains why the Equal Punishment Principle would not work in actual practice and the constructive messages we can send by ridding of the death penalty. The Equal Punishment Principle, adapted from the “an eye for an eye” principle, requires that we treat people based on how they treat others. This view, held by generations of philosophers, is attractive because it satisfies our belief that people deserve to be punished if they have done something wrong and because it is a universal, traditional moral standard. The Equal Punishment Principle is probably the most attractive to philosophers because it appears to deliver a measurable way to develop punishments for law-breakers; …show more content…
He claims that the death penalty supports the belief that the criminal made himself insignificant and without any value by the crimes he committed. Nathanson does not believe that this is our place to determine a human’s worth. Once a criminal no longer stands a threat to anyone, they should not be considered so worthless that we take their life. When a person commits a crime, they lose some rights. But according to the constitution, they still have the right to life because it is a natural, inalienable right. The right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not earned but it is acquired just from being a human and it cannot be lost (Timmons, 2007, pg. 545). Similarly, Nathanson believes that by abolishing the death penalty we can send the message that the inalienable rights are in fact treasured and the core of human dignity. It shows that even criminals deserve minimal respect and that human value cannot be

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    As John Morrison exclaimed,“It should be clear that the death penalty does just the opposite of promoting decency and respect for life... It can never be applied fairly.” Since the mid nineteenth century, inmates on death row have been murdered by a plethora of gruesome methods, such as venomous lethal injections, gas chambers, and electrocution. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there have been 1,413 executions in the United States from 1976 to the present. Although the number of death penalty verdicts are decreasing, flaws in the American judicial system have caused an increase in the amount of punishing wrongfully accused suspects to the death penalty.…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this paper, I will discuss Nathansons argument against capital punishment. I will discuss how Nathanson has responses to Haags arguments with two cases. I argue that Haag has good responses but I would agree with Nathanson to say that one must treat everyone the same depending on their crimes without treating each criminal differently even though they have committed the same crime but are not getting the same punishment. Haag’s primary objection in capital punishment was that it does not matter if the death penalty is administered arbitrarily because individual punishments depend on individual quilt alone, and whether punishments are distributed equally among the class of guilty persons does not matter.…

    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The implementation of the death penalty is a tricky and controversial subject. When writing for the New Republic in 1985, Edward I. Koch and David Bruck shared their judgement on capital punishment. They addressed the topic from two opposing viewpoints and challenged the death penalty’s effectiveness and place in American society today. Edward I. Koch served as mayor of the state of New York for eleven years and was involved in public service for a total of twenty years. In his essay titled, “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life,” Koch was adamant that the death penalty affirmed the highest value for human life by being the highest penalty (Koch 486).…

    • 1073 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In his article "Capital punishment’s slow death," George F. Will claims capital punishment is unjust. The death penalty is becoming used less over time, but Americans are still divided over whether it should be abolished or not. The movement created about capital punishment has split into liberals being against it and conservatives for it. This article is able to give insight into both sides, as George Will is a conservative who is against the death penalty.…

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The death penalty is the most severe form of current legal punishment. The question that is hotly debated is if this form of legal punishment is just and necessary. Hugo Bedau argues that capital punishment is not ethically acceptable. On the other hand, Ernest Van Den Haag argues that this penalty is completely necessary. This paper will summarize both opinions and give two reasons why the death penalty should be abolished, both from a ethical point of view and from a practical perspective.…

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The death penalty has been a topic of contention since it was introduced among humankind. The two sides of this issue are either for or against it. There are many solid points between the two disagreeing parties that need to be explored to make an informed decision on which side you would choose to support. Two essays I will draw from in this writing are written by Edward Koch, who is for, and David Bruck, who is against it. Both parties have made excellent points in their writings and will be great avenues to explore while making your decision.…

    • 1640 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    (1350)Against the Death Penalty: An Analysis of Reiman’s “Moderate” Retribution Theory This argument against the death penalty will examine the “moderate retribution theory of Jeffrey Reiman. In this theory, the premise of retribution for murder defines the validation of the death penalty, yet not in the abuse of justice found in the American criminal justice system. Reiman believes that the death penalty should be abolished because criminals are not always cognitively aware of the crimes that they commit, which demands the rehabilitation of the individual. Reiman argues against the death penalty because it offers an extreme form of punishment for crimes that are rarely “conscious” in the mind of the criminal.…

    • 1458 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Death Penalty Texas

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Not all the cases with death sentences is right, “I don't want to put one innocent person to death to put 99 that are guilty to death,” said Gary Johnson (Johnson 1). In addition, the cost of it is also excessively expensive; therefore, this solution is not as good as its definition. The death penalty has its impacts to the criminal behavior of people as the result of reducing crime rates since it was re-instituted. One can say keep it but only for a symbol. Life is precious, and no one has the right to end other’s…

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    When someone commits a crime there are many punishments they can receive. House arrest, fines, jail time are some of the most common. But one type of punishment is the most polarizing of them all, the death penalty. Whether the death penalty should be used is often a debated topic between the science of killing someone for their crimes, or the more religious beliefs that it is cruel and unusual to use the death penalty. When considering people who were sentenced to the death penalty like Gregg, Penry, and Baze.…

    • 522 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The death penalty has caused tension between more than just those who enforce it and those who receive it. The shock waves caused by the death penalty can be found building tension within the conversations of those who may not have a true role in the process but who, in the eyes of the American democracy, have a voice on the matter. As an observer of the current and past status of the death penalty, one can form the opinion and understanding the necessity of capital punishment in the form of the death penalty. The death penalty has been apart of the court rulings since its reinstatement in 1988. Although those who are against the death penalty would argue that each one of these deaths were not necessary to the safety of our nation..…

    • 1818 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the surveys to the general public, when given the alternative of life imprisonment without parole as opposed to the death penalty, the approval rate for the death penalty dropped. The death penalty should be abolished due to its inability to carry out one of its purposes of preventing other crime from oc-curring. In a perfect world, the death penalty would not ensue any racial or geographical bias, and there would be an even-handedness or general way of carrying out this punishment. Howev-er, this nation’s method fails to distribute it equally. The value of a human’s life cannot be meas-ure; consequently, the life’s worth cannot be equated with that of another’s life.…

    • 1610 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Nathanson argues that the decision should be made by the majority. He affirms that while some claim that criminals deserve death penalties for their sins, many regard death penalty as a threat to innocent lives instead of the guilty. Because government’s goal of protecting innocent citizens’ lives is more important than executing harmful individuals, governments should go with the majority and stop executions. Nathanson also argues that the cost of death sentences and execution procedures are far more expensive than the benefit of executing criminals. Finally, Nathanson argues that our legal system is not compatible with capital punishment.…

    • 415 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Stephen Nathanson, who wrote “An eye for an eye?” suggests the factual and moral beliefs about the death penalty are wrong and need to be strictly abolished. The passage states, “ A person’s actions, it seems, provide not only a basis for a moral appraisal of the person but also a guide to how he should be treated”. Also stated, “ What people deserve as recipients of rewards or punishments is determined by what they do as agents”. The argument claiming people should get a punishment based on what they do is accurate. What is not accurate however, is suggesting if someone murders another person, they should receive capital punishment.…

    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The key features of the argument on supporting the death penalty developed by Ernest Van Den Haag first focuses on matters of mal-distribution and determining if an individual really deserves it, second the miscarriages of justice, third if the death penalty is a better deterrence than other punishments, fourth the incidental issues that the death penalty promotes, and fifth justice, excess, and degradation. The first argument that Ernest Van Den Haag argues is on the matter of mal-distribution, and determining whether an individual really deserves capital punishment. He expresses his view that mal-distribution being compared between those individuals who are guilty or innocent is undeserved. The acts of capital punishment upon an individual who knowingly commits a crime and is considered guilty in that sense deserves the punishment. However, on the other hand he considers that when mal-distribution is then put upon an innocent life that did not commit the crime but is considered guilty is seen as than unjust.…

    • 1032 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the nineteenth chapter of the book of Deuteronomy in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible, the principle of “an eye for an eye” had established among the Israelites that any crime committed was not to go unnoticed and that the following punishment for the criminal was to be equivalent in severity to the crime itself, which they figured to be only firm and just as the criminal received a punishment adequate for his crime (Deuteronomy 19.21). Since the formation of complex, advanced societies by man up to the present day, people have always continuously argued over what constitutes a just punishment and if should be equivalent to, or even resemble in some cases, the crime committed. Although some people may not agree otherwise, the principle…

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays