Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
2 pages/≈550 words
Sources:
Check Instructions
Style:
APA
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Coursework
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 10.37
Topic:

Kant and Retributive Justice Social Sciences Coursework

Coursework Instructions:

INTRODUCTION
The objective of this assignment is to evaluate your ability to apply Kantian ethics to evaluate different theories of punishment. Please read carefully the instructions before answering the question.
BASIC RULES
1. Cite your references. DON'T PLAGIARIZE. 2. You have to type in the assignment directly on Blackboard. 3. ATTACHED FILES WILL NOT BE GRADED. 3. The assignment must be submitted before October 23 at 11:59 p.m. 4. Any kind of plagiarism will be punished according to the Disciplinary Code of South Texas College and the Syllabus. 5. If you have doubts, please contact me during my office hours. 6. You are only allowed to submit one attempt. 7. In case of doubts, review the following video to learn how to type in your assignments. https://www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=nCwOciSEbWA 8. There is not a word limit for the assignment; however, assignments are usually answered using between 200-500 words per question
LEARNING MATERIAL
Mark Dimmock and Andrew Fisher, Ethics for A-Level. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers, 2017, chapter 2, pp. 31-45
Ian Marsh et al, Criminal Justice: An Introduction to Philosophies, Theories and Practices, 2004, London: Routledge, pp. 12-24
EdPuzzle: Crash Course Video: Kant & Categorical Imperatives
QUESTIONS
1. List three arguments in favor or against the capital punishment. Explain if they are based on a utilitarian or a retributive system of punishment.
2. Use your OWN example to explain the second formulation of the Categorical Imperative.
3. Should we punish those who unsuccessfully attempt suicide? Answer this question using Kantian Ethics.

Coursework Sample Content Preview:

Kantian Ethics
[name]
[school/course]
[professor]
[date]1.The first argument against capital punishment is that no matter how grave the person's acts are, it does not remove the fact that he/she has the right over his/her body. The decision to harm another person's physicality neglects that person's right to choose for his/her good. This argument is a utilitarianism as it considers the person's rights and autonomy despite being punishable. The person's actions may, at worse, harm another life but harming the former's life does not result in a better world system.
The second argument is that capital punishment may only be releasing another person's anger and it does not solve the situation created. Instead of solving the problem from its roots, the punishers may only be cutting the buds and not doing the majority a good resolution. This is utilitarianism in the sense that it considers the whole situation of both the sinner and the punisher, as well as the other people.
The third argument is that it is enough punishment that people be deprived of their social rights and be informed of the gravity of their actions. Although they have autonomy, there is still a need to address their actions to solve the situation. This is retributive justice because it gives punishment to the person in an amount that equates to his/her sin. In a way, it is also utilitarian as it still considers a person's autonomy. Depriving the person of social rights also consider the other people because they are protected fr...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Order

You Might Also Like Other Topics Related to capital punishment:

HIRE A WRITER FROM $11.95 / PAGE
ORDER WITH 15% DISCOUNT!
Order Now