The Application of the Principle of Utilitarianism in Explaining the Death Penalty

Introduction Death penalty is a way of punishing people found guilty of committing capital offences. There are few countries that apply this form of punishment. The methods used to punish offenders are controversial in several jurisdictions depending on the nation’s cultural and political ideologies. There are people who support this form of punishment. On the contrary, other people strongly oppose capital punishment.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Application of the Principle of Utilitarianism in Explaining the Death Penalty specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This paper discusses death penalty from the point of view of utilitarian principles. These principles suggest that the form of punishment has the ability to deter similar crimes. It also suggests that capital punishment is suitable for wrong doings that involve taking away the life of others. The opponents of death penalty believe that the punishm ent is too harsh and infringes upon human rights. They also believe that it lacks the ability to deter future crimes. Utilitarianism is a moral theory, which posits that â€Å"the moral worth of an action is solely determined by its contribution to overall utility† (Dreeben-Irimia 292). The theory supports consequences of actions without scrutinizing methods for implementing the actions. The theory was widely promoted by John Stuart Mill who suggested that initiatives were evaluated based on their consequences. The theory considers the pursuit of contentment and ensuring that people are happy with decisions. The theory promotes three claims including the consequentiality, happiness, and objectivity claim. The theory suggests that punishing people is equal to treating them badly and is a sign of mischief. From the outlook, it would appear that utilitarian’s may contest capital punishment because it creates unhappiness. However, the theory supports a form of punishment w hen the level of suffering is so high that it is beneficial to society. The theory posits that a punishment that makes the society can only emanate from intense suffering. Evidently, a form of punishment that generates more happiness in society is justifiable under the utilitarian theory. The theory supports capital punishment on the basis of deterrence. When punishment is instilled in potential wrongdoers, they cannot commit crimes because they understand the type of punishment they will go through. The theory also supports incapacitation where people who have committed capital crimes can never have the opportunity to repeat such wrongdoings.Advertising Looking for essay on ethics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Therefore, capital punishment takes away wrongdoers from the streets and eliminates the danger to the public. The form of punishment also provides people and families of victims with the proof that justice will be se rved. The relatives of people killed by criminals gain comfort and fulfillment because they know the offender has received equal punishment. As opposed to this, the opponents of the application of utilitarianism theory in retribution argue that this form of punishment has minimal effect on containing related crimes. The opponents have noted that states where people receive capital punishment continue to record high numbers of capital offences. Furthermore, the form of punishment is final and takes away life and this makes it inappropriate in cases where suspected wrongdoers are wrongfully convicted. Conclusion In summary, utilitarianism supports the retribution only on the grounds that there will be increased safety within a society. The theory believes that. The principle promotes the objective of happiness even when the consequences of actions leading to that entail making other people suffer. The supporters of the theory and its application are convinced that deterrence and incap acitation make people happy. On the other hand, opponents of utilitarianism argue that proponents have failed to provide proof that the form of punishment minimizes future offences. Works Cited Dreeben-Irimia, Olga.  Patient Education in Rehabilitation. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2010. Print. This essay on The Application of the Principle of Utilitarianism in Explaining the Death Penalty was written and submitted by user Nia P. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Life of Frederick Douglass essays

Life of Frederick Douglass essays In this brief passage by Frederick Douglass, called Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, he describes prime examples of a pure Machiavellian. Douglass gives us insight on Mrs. Hamilton, a slave owner, who just like Machiavelli explains in The Qualities of the Prince shows us what exactly Machiavelli was talking about. Mrs. Hamilton is cruel to her slaves in order to keep them loyal and is never peaceful during idle times in order to keep her slaves at her advantage. Douglasss encounters with Mrs. Hamilton again show us exactly how Machiavelli wanted a leader to control the people and with this Douglass shows us how Mrs. Hamilton being the leader, controls the slaves which are her subjects. When Frederick Douglass first introduces us to Mrs. Hamilton he gives us a well-developed visual on how she treated her slaves. Mrs. Hamilton would sit in the middle of the room in a large chair with a heavy cow skin by her side. She would then whip the slaves, as they would pass by her while she yelled at them, and called them names. Mrs. Hamilton would also call Mary pecked than by her name. I see this type of treatment as full Machiavellian from Mrs. Hamilton. Machiavelli in his work The Qualities of a Prince suggests to leader that they should be cruel to their subjects in order to keep them loyal. I sense that by what Mrs. Hamilton was doing to her slaves may be looked at from a different way than by just plain cruel. It shows to me that she was just keeping her slaves loyal to her by whipping them and calling them names. And this to me shows that she took an approach using a structured Machiavellian style. If Mrs. Hamilton did not exercise this type of treatment to her slaves they would probably feel that if they decided to escape for freedom to the North, Mrs. Hamilton would not have punished them for it and let them to free. Mrs. Hamilton also uses another one of Machiavellis suggestions. M ...