Aristotle Anti-Death

Aristotle Anti-Death Penalty

The death penalty is one of the controversial topics that plague American society today. The moral and ethical battles are ones that have been in existence as long as capital punishment has. Different methods of the death penalty have gone through many phases of development throughout the ages. Since its establishment there has been death by hanging, death by decapitation, death by electric chair, and the most commonly used method, death by lethal injection. This rare form of punishment often goes against what the penal system is set in place for: rehabilitation. Because of this reason, Aristotle takes his position on the side opposing the death penalty, because it is an unnecessary punishment. There is no exact wording of Aristotle’s’ in the reading that exemplifies his position on Capital punishment, but his thoughts on the topic can be understood from his teachings. Aristotle says: “He who is not good, then, cannot sympathize with himself in joy or sorrow; for his soul is divided against itself: one part of him, by reason of its viciousness, is pained at being deprived of something, while another part of him is pleased; on part pulls this way, another that, tearing him to pieces, as it were, between them.”

People that are on death row have committed a serious crime. Some people have even committed a series of brutal murders that has earned them such a fate. But a lot of death row inmates do not kill just because they like vacations to jail. Most receive some type of twisted pleasure off of ending someone else’s life. An example of this would be the case of Michael Ross. Driven by violent sexual fantasies, Michael confessed to brutally raping and murdering eight young girls. He was convicted of four and sentenced to the death penalty. The rape of a woman by a serial rapist is never about the physical pleasure, but about the mental pleasure of obtaining power over your victim. He was pleased at the times of his brutal acts, but now that he has been locked away, he is pained by the lack of this pleasure, so by Aristotle’s interpretation, he cannot sympathize with himself and he tears himself into pieces. Although Aristotle’s writings signify that a “bad man” will suffer, this suffering can come from simple incarceration, it is not necessary for the death penalty. Today’s penal system is set up on the basis of rehabilitation. In many cases of death row inmates today, you see a large number supposedly come closer to God. Although their true motivations for this conversion cannot be proved without letting them back into society, the possibility for rehabilitation for even the most heinous of murders is possible. This possibility is a gateway for these people finding happiness. In the text, Aristotle asks “What goals should human beings have? What sort of life should they attempt to live?”

He then states that the “obvious and widely agreed upon” answer is of course: happiness. For Aristotle living a life not directed toward finding true happiness is not living virtuous, or ethical. But taking ones chance at seeking true happiness is not ethical or moral. It is true that most convicted inmates took someone else’s chance at finding that pure happiness away, but they are still people and they still deserve their chance. And what if a righteous man is denied his chance at finding happiness? In recent years many death row inmates have been exonerated due to new DNA evidence that was not previously available. Aristotle believes that “bad men” receive the due justice by means of incarceration when they are separated form their pleasures. The internal pain of no longer being able to fulfill that pleasure should tear one apart, not allowing one to “sympathize” with themselves. But also denying ones life denies ones happiness; which keeps a person from ever becoming a virtuous person. So even though Aristotle never draws a distinct line about his standpoint on Capital punishment, by looking at his readings provided by the book a clearer understanding of his viewpoint can be formed.

Bibliography

Robert C. Solomon and Clancy W. Martin, Morality and the Good Life: An introduction to Ethics through Classical Sources, 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill, 2003) 111,144

Charles Montaldo, "Profile of Serial Killer”, “Michael Ross”., About.com, http://crime.about.com/od/deathrow/p/michael_ross.htm

Bibliography: Robert C. Solomon and Clancy W. Martin, Morality and the Good Life: An introduction to Ethics through Classical Sources, 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill, 2003) 111,144 Charles Montaldo, "Profile of Serial Killer”, “Michael Ross”., About.com, http://crime.about.com/od/deathrow/p/michael_ross.htm