Aristotle & Mill on Capital Punishment

What place does the death penalty have in the criminal justice system? Should it be used to deter other criminals, should it be used to punish those who commit crimes, or does it have any place at all? In understanding the issue of the death penalty from a moral perspective, it is important to look back at philosophers of the past to better understand the ethical ramifications of the concept of capital punishment. We will be examining two notable philosophers—Aristotle and Immanuel Kant. Through their ideas on justice and theories of punishment for crime, we will be able to better understand how they viewed an issue such as the death penalty. Moreover, in modern day discussions of the issue, sides will argue consequentialist factors such as; the pain that capital punishment might inflict, evidence (or lack of evidence) of deterrence, and the cost of an extensive appellate process. Here, however, we will simply be examining the issues surrounding virtue and duty with regards to capital punishment, as Aristotle and Kant were virtue and duty based philosophers, respectively. Through this unique lens we may better understand the issue and ethical complications surrounding the issue as we observe how Aristotle and Kant make their arguments.

Capital punishment is a very controversial topic, both in the present and in history. Although it is argued to be an effective deterrent against severe crimes and gives closure to the victim’s family, the death penalty often incorrectly targets innocent people, costs extra money, and sends the wrong message about killing.

Capital punishment is a difficult subject for a lot of people because many question whether or not it is ethical to kill a convicted criminal. In order to critically analyze whether or not it is ethical, I will look at the issue using a utilitarianism approach because in order to get a good grasp of this topic we need to look at how the decision will impact us in the future. The utilitarianism approach will help us to examine this issue and see what some of the consequences are with this topic of capital punishment. For years, capital punishment has been used against criminals and continues to be used today, but lately this type of punishment has come into question because of the ethical question.

In this paper I will be discussing everything you need to know about the death penalty such as its pros and cons. While the innocent can be killed, the death penalty has its pros because it prevents them from killing again if they are released or have escaped from prison, it helps overpopulated prisons, and it can help victims’ families get justice and closure. Not only can the innocent be killed, but in the past the death penalty was very inhumane. To some its feels right but to others they feel like 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Most people think that the defendant deserves the death penalty, but what does the defendants’ family think?

Since the mid 1900’s, capital punishment has brought many individuals into many diverse view points throughout the years. Capital punishment is a way of punishing a convict by killing him or her because of the crime he or she committed. Capital punishment will always have its pros and cons. There are opponents who absolutely disagree with capital punishment. And then there are advocates who support the idea. In the advocates view point, capital punishment is a way to minimize the threat in the world today. In the opponent’s point of view, opponents disagree with capital punishment, because of the high expenses it brings to the states. Also, opponents argue that capital punishment

Capital punishment has been a hot topic for quite some time now. In earlier times it was merely a way to punish as well as an attempt to deter members of society from committing heinous crimes. In the last century we have actively monitored the effects of capital punishment, and this has revealed the truth. It is for these reasons capital punishment is not morally acceptable.

Capital punishment has been a controversial issue that still exists in America today. Capital punishment is a law passed by the government to punish any individual that has been convicted of committed a heinous crime. The death penalty has been a method used throughout history as punishment for criminals. The punishment also known as the death penalty is a scheduled execution, which would be done with lethal injection. The reason why this punishment is chosen is because when crimes are committed that shock the conscience, the immediate emotional reaction is to retaliate with severe punishment (Schnurbush 2016). The death penalty is debated when it is brought up, opinions vary from one group of people to another, one side says the execution is murder, and the other saying that it is justice being done. Each side presents valid arguments to why people should be for it or against it; people’s opinions are formed by personal beliefs.

Capital punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is a controversial subject which has been argued for decades due to the ethical decisions involved. People believe the death penalty is the right thing to do and that it is the perfect example of ‘justice’ while others believe that it is immoral and overly expensive. The death penalty is not a logical sentence for criminals, it doesn’t give them the right type of justice and it is immoral.

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

Capital punishment is most commonly known as the death penalty or punishment by death for a crime. It is a highly controversial topic and many people and great thinkers alike have debated about it. Two well-known figures are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. Although both stand in favor of capital punishment, their reasons for coming to this conclusion are completely different. I personally stand against capital punishment, but my own personal view on it incorporates a few mixed elements from both individuals as well as my own personal insight. Firstly, in order to understand why Kant and Mill support capital punishment, we must first understand their views on punishment in general.

Capital punishment has raised debate in America since 1608. Both the “pro-“ and “anti-“ sides of the issue have strong arguments. Some believe killing is simply wrong, and violates universal human rights, others seek the only justice they deem appropriate, equal justice. I will examine the philosophies of Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill, with regards to their stance on the death penalty.

The controversy over the legal process widely applied in ancient times— the death penalty— has always intrigued me because of the reasonable stances from both sides on whether it should be legal or illegal. The dispute goes between the biggest issues of immorality behind the act, if it gives the best suffering over jail time, and human rights. Personally, I side with illegalization of the capital punishment, yet can resonate with some of the common legal sided thoughts.

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

This passage presents a discussion about arguments concerning morality of the death penalty. This is an important debate to both proponents and opponents of the death penalty because of the serious implications of the punishment. The two positions argue whether or not the death penalty should be prohibited. Both viewpoints have valid claims warranting consideration. For example, evidence indicates that death sentence is both cruel and immoral. In contrast, opposing evidence suggests that is a moral punishment for certain offenders. While both sides of the issue have valid points, the claim that the death penalty should not be prohibited is the stronger position, the position supported by the preponderance of the evidence cited in the passage. The most convincing and forceful reasons in support of the position that capital punishment should still be used are that it is the only moral punishment for brutal and heinous crimes, that it is more humane than a life long prison sentence, and that it was found to be constitutional by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, these reasons and opposing viewpoint will be discussed next.

Also, there are parts of the article where Mill contradicts his argument to have the death penalty. For example, he states,” that if by an error of justice an innocent person is put to death, the mistake can never be corrected.” This statement is concerning because if