The third contemporary issue was on capital punishment and I feel as though this issue affected all of my principles, both social and personal. It affected my belief in John Locke's writings about equality for all because I don't believe somebody should be killed because it's not giving them an equal opportunity to life. It affected my belief in Sartre's existentialism because he believes in how every individual's actions are responsible for all humanity, which makes me believe that by enforcing capital punishment it is setting a bad example for all humanity. It also affected my personal principle of treating others how you wished to be treated because I know for certain that is it was me facing the capital punishment then I wouldn't want to be killed.
I believed more in Hook's views on capital punishment, he wanted to abolish it but he thought it was okay for repeat offenders because they obviously had not learnt there lesson from before. I'm not sure how to feel about the conviction of repeat offenders but it does seem more justified that being a one time offender.
Out of all of the contemporary issues, this one did not sway my believes at all like the other two did. It completely went against what I believed in. However, it made it seem like I'm just following those few guidelines so to speak, just because they're the ones I most believed in when we learnt them in class.
I think that for me to become a more effective ethical being I must consider my own principles thoroughly and to read more on other philosophers, rather than just a select few. I also think it would be good for me to speak to people that actually have the complete opposite principles as I do because in doing so I can see how strong my beliefs are by trying to prove them to somebody that completely disapproves.
This week I commented on http://jessbiondi.blogspot.com/ and http://ashantijones.blogspot.com/
