Crystal Waite

Moral Quandaries Paper

I have chosen to discuss views on Capital punishment. A deontological view of capital

punishment, although the action itself of killing another would be considered wrong. I think that

the act of such bad will that would lead to the action of killing another would take over. If the

person chooses to not have any good will, only bringing bad to himself and others than the action

of killing would be justified. “And in this standpoint, he is conscious of a good will which on his

own confession constitutes the law for his bad will as a member of the sensible world. He

recognizes the status of the law even while he breaks it.” (Kant pg. 47)

In considering a utilitarian view, the action does not necessary matter if the action brings greater

good to majority of society. “With many, the test of justice in penal infliction is that the

punishment should be proportioned to the offence; meaning that it should be exactly measured

by the moral guilt of the culprit (whatever be their standard for measuring moral guilt): the

consideration, what amount of punishment is necessary to deter from the offence, having nothing

to do with the question of justice, in their estimation: while there are others to whom that

consideration is all in all; who maintain that it is not just, at least for man, to inflict on a fellow

creature, whatever may be his offences, any amount of suffering beyond the least that will

suffice to prevent him from repeating, and others from imitating, his misconduct.” (Mill Ch. 5) If

a person’s crimes have brought no good to society or to himself, then deciding that an action is

needed to provide better for society would be considered good. If the person were able to correct

his actions and be a productive member of society would the action of capital punishment be

wrong? If this person’s actions no matter how much good he could bring are still to the extreme

of horrible than regardless of what good he could bring afterwards, capital punishment would

still be considered right.

 Crystal Waite
Moral Quandaries Paper

When considering the ethics of caring, if you look at the father’s view, I will agree that this view

would consider capital punishment right if the crimes committed warranted it. In the sense of a

mother’s view or women, I think this depends greatly of the person being cared for. If the victim

of the crime is the person that was being cared for than the person making the determining

decision of whether capital punishment is right or wrong would consider it to be right. They

would want justice brought to the person that committed the crime and this would allow for the

family of the victim to try to obtain some form of closure. If the person facing capital

punishment is a person caring for someone that was murdered and they are taking on the role of

an eye for an eye than their action for killing would be somewhat considered justified. Although

they were committing a crime, they were doing it because of an action that was brought on the

person they cared for. If the person facing capital punishment is the one that was being cared for,

I would think anyone caring for that person regardless of the crimes they committed would not

want them to face capital punishment.

After considering all 3 views, I think I would agree with the ethics of caring. I would want as

much information as possible, such as the history of the person that committed the crime, the

history of the person that the crime was committed against, and the actions of the person that

committed the crime after the crime happened. Was the crime planned and executed for the sole

purpose of gaining money, drugs, or status? My opinion would not be just based on the action

itself of capital punishment, but on the crimes that led to it. I don’t think a view on capital

punishment is just black and white, I think there are situations that warrant it and then there are

situations that do not.