Back
Uncategorized

Capital Punishment Arguement: Primoratz & Nathanson

Write a 5-6 page critical essay that addresses the prompt below. Your paper should not only exposit the relevant arguments from the text along with appropriate evidence and citations, but also you are required to provide some critical evaluation. The difficulty will be in limiting what you include to those arguments relevant to answering the question. Be concise so that you can include everything necessary within the page limit.

You may use whatever citation style you’re comfortable with, just be consistent throughout the paper. If you use outside sources (which is not required), make sure to cite them properly in your paper.

Prompt:

Our first major topic was Capital Punishment. Begin by explaining the positions of the two authors (Primoratz & Nathanson). Be sure to explain the major factors each author thinks justifies their position on capital punishment.

Go on to argue whose position you find more convincing, and explain why. If you find neither position convincing, develop some foundations for your own view, but be sure to explain what problems your own view solves that the previous views do not.

Finally, apply your position to a new criminal justice topic of your choice, and explain how your position could give insight on how to address your chosen topic. What you should be thinking about and explaining here is how your chosen theoretical commitments on capital punishment apply to a different topic.

To summarize, your paper must include the following features:

(1) Exposit each author’s general position, their specific arguments, and identify where it is the two authors disagree.

(2) Argue for whose position you find more convincing, and explain why. Alternatively, develop your own position.

(3) Apply your position from (2) to a new criminal justice topic of your choice. You should explain how your position could give insight on how to address your chosen topic.

(4) OPTIONAL: If you find you’re under the page requirement you can always consider objections to your own view, but explain why they are not conclusive.