philosophy paper4

philosophy paper4 - Meredith Thomas Philosophy 211 April...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Meredith Thomas Philosophy 211 April 14, 2010 Defense of the Death Penalty Louis P. Pojman begins his defense of the death penalty by reminding his audience of the Nuremberg Trials following World War II. He uses this example to point out the reader’s feelings of desert for these Nazi leaders that caused the taking of nearly twelve million lives. With this allusion, Pojman proves that by accepting the judgment at Nuremberg, the death penalty can be warranted in cases today. Pojman argues in his defense that murderers deserve a punishment proportional to their crime, and capital punishment deters would-be criminals from committing first-degree murder. I argue that Pojman is correct and the use of capital punishment is justified by the greater good of saving innocent lives. One might object that Pojman’s support of capital punishment is a morally unacceptable thirst for revenge. These objecting abolitionists feel that it is wrong to punish murder with murder because the State is doubling the evil. This argument continues with the objections that execution puts thoughts of barbarity into society and only adds to the troubles already existing. In reference to Pojman’s argument that the death penalty deters potential murderers, an
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 3

philosophy paper4 - Meredith Thomas Philosophy 211 April...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online