Max Sawicky wrote:
>
>
> Just so. People are held responsible for their own actions.
> They are not dumb brutes manipulated by their environment. Which
> is the more humanistic view?
Determinists typically don't believe that people are dumb brutes manipulated by the environment. You need an argument why people should be held responsible for their actions or an argument that causal determinism is irrelevant to the question of punishment. If causal determinism is true and every event has a cause and human behavior is comprised of events then people cannot be held responsible for their actions because there is no way they could have acted otherwise.
Utilitarian defenses , where it is in the greater good of society to terminate someone's life because that person makes no contribution or a negative contribution to society are poor too. Executing useless "bread gobblers" led to Dachau and Aushwitz. Lynching someone may raise the total happiness of society but the person may be innocent (scapegoating). It does not answer the question of whether capital punishment is right or wrong.
Accepting the right of the state to dole out punishment as it sees fit, means accepting the legitimacy of the state (which I don't). People are not free leave the domain of the state and do not give their consent to be ruled by the state.People are born into a society where the state rules by force of arms and not consent. It is also against the state's rules do deny the legitimacy of the state (treason). The state is a protection racket for the rich. I have no liquifiable assets, why should i pay taxes to protect the property rights of the rich?
Further, crimes are often committed out of selfishness, greed and lack of concern for others. It is hypocritical to condemn someone for acting on the values that this society uphold as virtues. Lastly, capital punishment does not deter and does prevent people from committing crimes in the future but imprisonment does the same.
>
>
> You assume bloodlust rather than other motives. I'm no zoologist
> but watching one of the nature shows w/my daughter (there's some
> violence on TV for you), there was an episode where adult lions
> routinely kill baby cheetahs without eating them, and for no
> apparent reason. So I suspect you are inaccurate on this one.
>
> mbs
Well, a biologist might explain it differently such the cheetahs were invading the lions feeding ground or its area where it rears its young. The lion may have felt the cheetahs were threatening its habitat. The domestic cat is the only other animal I think of that has bloodlust but they are domesticated. Very murky territory at any rate. My point about bloodlust, is that the motive for the death penalty seems, prima facie, to be revenge "The killer got we he deserved". Revenge does not do anything except satisfy bloodlust.
Sam