Revenge. Punishment. Discipline. Are these three qualities synonymous? Do they coincide with one another? While most would argue that they are all connected, they would likewise be able to acknowledge differences between them as well. Which expresses morality? Are they all necessary? Again, questions like these evoke the inevitability of compare and contrast, and notice how I emphasized “contrast.” While all are similar in that they are often the result of some unfortunate, condemned behavior or action, they all differ somehow.
Punishment: “a penalty inflicted for an offense, fault, etc.”
Discipline: “punishment inflicted by way of correction and training.”
Analyzing all three definitions, similarities are extracted such as the prevalence of “punishment” in both revenge and discipline, “inflicted” in both punishment and discipline, and all three explaining that it is in effect to wrongful doings. However, in the midst of similarity, is distinctiveness. For instance, while discipline presents its definition with positive connotation through “correction and training,” revenge utilizes negative connotation by explaining that the spirit of punishment is “resentful” or “vindictive.” Thus, based on ethics, discipline and appropriate punishment evidently deem the most ethical results of misconduct, while revenge deems impractical and immoral. However, before the establishments of prisons, revenge was justified instead through the death penalty.
Although still around today, the death penalty proved to be unethical and indecent by innumerable amounts of people throughout society, justifying it now in specific states and for the most heinous crimes, most markedly, murder. However, dating back to the 1600s, the death penalty was especially prevalent and utilized for miniscule crimes such as stealing valueless things and trading with certain colonies. Acclaimed for succumbing to Britain’s influence in regard to the death penalty, America used it frequently and indecently in the public eye for many years.
It was only until the nineteenth century that American citizens’ proclamation of ethics were heard by legislature and laws began to get passed. Although the death penalty wasn’t abolished completely, laws such as eliminating the death from the public eye was passed, creating correctional facilities, and eliminating it from certain states were all accomplished. However, despite its participation still today in 2018, revolting methods of killing deteriorated, replaced by lethal injections to increase the morality of the deed. Additionally, people continue to fight for complete abomination.
Arguing that the death penalty is mere revenge rather than appropriate punishment, protests ensue. Similar to the fight against abortion, mass amounts of people implore ethical reevaluation by proclaiming murder.
Differing from controversies such as abortion however, the death penalty is hypocritical in that killing killers isn’t justifiable, it is just mere revenge. How does that make sense? For instance, isn’t the purpose of punishment and discipline as defined by the dictionary a penalty by means of “correction and training”? That won’t work if we abolish the offender completely. And then where is the penalty for the individuals participating in the killing through the death penalty?
It is understandable that people will always have contrasting views on controversial issues, particularly the death penalty. But while costly, immoral, and unnecessary due to the harsh environment of prisons, views regarding the death penalty have wavered astronomically since the first documented execution in the 1600s. As philosophical views remain prevalent and other controversies emerge, I predict more shift in public opinion of the death penalty and more laws passed because of it.
The paradigm shift of the death penalty from being typical to being publicly known as unethical is a great paradigm shift; it actually reflects a change in society’s perception of something. In other words, great topic choice! However, it’s hard for me to understand what your key historical event that triggered the paradigm shift would be. Would it just be “the nineteenth century”? That seems a bit too broad. Would it be a specific one laws passed against the death penalty that you mentioned?
I think the way you approached this topic is so interesting! Analyzing revenge, punishment, and discipline in terms of the death penalty makes for a very intriguing read. Since you can sort of place your finger on when the shift began but not when it ends (as it’s still occurring right now, in a sense), I think your essay will be very interesting.
Interesting topic for a paradigm shift essay. I wonder what certain things specifically caused such a change in practice- from public hangings to discreet lethal injections. While there is a push by many to get rid of capital punishment, I personally believe that it should be legal, but only used in extreme cases. For example, if a person kills 10+ people and there is surmounting evidence that they committed the act, then it could potentially bring peace to families, friends, or others to know that what happened to the victims couldn’t possibly happen to anyone else.