This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Ng 1 Sharon Ng Professor Skrentny, TA Megan Strom DOC 2 C06 27 January 2011 DOC 2 Midterm Study Guide Format: title/author/date, synopsis, main argument, key terms/concepts, counterargument? Chapter 1: Exodus 21: 23-27 (c. 100 BCE) from the Old Testament Synopsis: This excerpt concerns laws about permanent injury. If you harm someone, you will have to be punished and money cannot buy your way out of it. The punishment you receive should be equal to the pain youve caused the injured to have. Main argument: The main argument is that when someone permanently hurts someone, money cannot be paid to exempt the criminal. This is not enough or fair because rich people could easily pay their way out of their crime. It is argued that penalty should be equal to the pain inflicted. Different penalties may include loss of property, banishment, or public humiliation. Key terms/concepts: The notion of justice is demonstrated because it is laid out that the criminal gets punished the same amount worth of his crime. Counterargument: One may counter argue and say that people should be able to pay money out of their crime, but this would not demonstrate justice because it would not be fair to other criminals that may not have the wealth advantage, and also it would not be fair for the one whom the pain was inflicted upon. That person would think its fair that the criminal get punished an amount they actually deserve for inflicting the crime. Other people may also argue that other forms of punishment are too harsh, especially if someone really regrets doing what they did. However, this is not moral because one cannot just give people the benefit of the doubt. Rather, justice must be practiced and equal punishments should be implemented. Ng 2 Chapter 2: Matthew 5:39 (c. 70 AD) from the New Testament Synopsis: Retaliation is not the answer in any circumstance. It is wise for one to be the bigger person and be able to accept that everyone is entitled to his or her own beliefs and opinions, and be respectful of that. Main argument: One should not retaliate even if he disagrees with someone because everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions. Key terms/concepts: It is in ones moral interest to respect other peoples beliefs, as he would want others to respect his. This is a fair situation because everyones ideas are equally expressed and respected, in a peaceful, mature manner. Nonviolent resistance is also displayed because although one may be entitled to his opinion, he doesnt have to retaliate physically to prove his point; he could just hold his own belief while other people hold theirs. It is important to be the bigger person and suppress the urge to seek revenge....
View Full Document
- Winter '08
- Democracy in America