[Vision2020] Another good argument for the death penalty

[Joe Campbell]

I won't comment on the death penalty, Art, BUT the argument about  
ethics below is a BAD argument.

First, the view that knowledge is possible only through empirical test  
is itself a philosophical view. Thus, it should be just as unprovable  
as you claim ethical principles to be. The view is self-refuting.

Second, some ethical principles are just as knowable as empirical  
claims. I am as certain that slavery is wrong as I am that my hand  
exists. Certainly people might dispute that slavery is wrong but it  
can't follow from that that "slavery is wrong" is unknowable. It is a  
consequence of the Duheim-Quine thesis that ANY evidence can be  
rejected if one is willing to accept the consequences and revise  
enough of their beliefs. If you think that dispute means lack of  
knowledge it is easy to show that no one knows anything.

Third, and related to the above, you can't give a non-question begging  
proof of the existence of anything, even your hand. What you can do is  
show that our actions convey that we all believe it (given it is  
true). But the same can be shown about ethical claims. Or so I think.

Obviously this is controversial but the point is that your argument  
asumes all knowledge is gained by empirical proof. But this won't even  
work for your belief that you have a hand. Once you show me why it is  
that you are entitled to believe that you have a hand, I'm pretty  
confident I can duplicate the story for at least one moral claim.  
Again, if you push the view you are holding, skepticism follows. But  
then ethical principles are no longer unique.

Lastly, often what seems to be an ethical disagreement is really  
something else, say, a metaphysical dispute. Take the abortion issue.  
Both sides AGREE that it is wrong to kill innocent persons. They  
disagree about the metaphysical issue, e.g., what is a person? (This  
is a simplification but hopefully you get the point.)

Now it might turn out that metaphysically issues are irresolveable  
and, for that reason there will always be disagreement about abortion.  
But you should be careful about drawing similar conclusions about  
ethics.

Dispute is part of the human condition. It is more common in  
philosophy and ethics but it exists even in math (think about  
Euclidean vs. non-Euclidean geometry). Absolutely NO broad conclusions  
about the impossibility of resolution can be drawn from this fact. So  
please keep talking about ethics!

Best, Joe

On Mar 15, 2010, at 11:22 PM, "Art Deco" <deco at moscow.com> wrote:

> Here's why arguments like we are engaged in cannot be resolved given  
> our current state of knowledge:
>
> Ethical principles are not completely amenable to resolution by  
> evidence or testing.  If they were, we wouldn't have such a wide  
> diversity of opinion on ethical matters held by decent, reasonable  
> people.  It's not like establishing Ohm's law or the Theory of  
> Conditioned Reflexes.  Facts count, but even when people agree on  
> the facts, they may not agree on an underlying ethical principle.
>
> It appears you are arguing for the principle that capital is never  
> justified, or equivalently there is not a single case where capital  
> punishment is justified.
>
> How would you empirically establish the truth of such a broad  
> statement?  What observations would render the probability of such a  
> statement being 1.00?
>
> The best we can do in our current state of knowledge (the absence of  
> an agreed method to establish ethical principles without doubt) is  
> to attempt to persuade others by citing facts or other ethical  
> principles which they may agree upon.
>
> In order to refute the statement "There is not a single case where  
> capital punishment is justified." only a single case need be shown.
>
> I offered Joseph E. Duncan III as a counter-example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III 
> )
>
> "Joseph Edward Duncan (born February 25, 1963) is an American  
> convicted serial killer and sex offender who received national  
> attention after being arrested in connection with the kidnapping of  
> Shasta Groene,[1] aged 8, and her brother Dylan,[2] 9, and being  
> featured on America's Most Wanted.[3] He pled guilty in December  
> 2007 to 10 federal counts involving the kidnapping and torture of  
> the children and the murder of Dylan at a remote campsite west of  
> the Rocky Mountain Front, and was sentenced to death under federal  
> laws for kidnapping resulting in death (he had already pleaded  
> guilty in state court) on August 27, 2008. As of October 27, 2009,  
> Duncan was being tried in Riverside County, California for the 1997  
> murder of Anthony Michael Martinez."
>
> There is a lot more, a horrifyingly graphic, sickening more.
>
> I could have also cited a number of confessed serial murderers or  
> used those old favorites Hitler and Saddam Hussein.
>
> Given your belief in the statement "There is not a single case where  
> capital punishment is justified." such counterexamples would not be  
> persuasive to you.  You would still hold the above ethical principle  
> to be true despite the lack of a method to demonstrate it's truth.   
> However, some people might be persuaded that Duncan should be  
> executed and make his case an exception to their general opposition  
> to capital punishment.  In fact, I know of at least one such person.
>
> Until there is a method to establish the truth of general ethical  
> principles differences of opinion like ours are not likely to be  
> resolved.  We may persuade each other about certain cases or classes  
> of cases (like those where guilt is questionable), but in general we  
> have no way to come to agreement like we might if we were arguing  
> about the cause of diabetes or whether syphilis is caused by  
> urinating in the moonlight.
>
>
> W.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sunil Ramalingam
> To: Art Deco ; Vision 2020
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 7:15 PM
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Another good argument for the death penalty
>
> Not even him, and you want to kill for less than that.
>
> From: deco at moscow.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:10:12 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Another good argument for the death penalty
>
> Joseph E. Duncan III
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sunil Ramalingam
> To: Art Deco ; Vision 2020
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 6:41 PM
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Another good argument for the death penalty
>
> I've never seen a good argument for the death penalty from you, Wayne.
>
> Sunil
>
> From: deco at moscow.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:15:37 -0700
> Subject: [Vision2020] Another good argument for the death penalty
>
> Another good argument for the death penalty:
>
> Updated March 15, 2010
>
> Ex-Bank President Arrested for Allegedly Lying to Get TARP Money
>
> AP
>
>
> The former president of a small community bank was arrested on  
> charges that he lied to the federal government to get a piece of the  
> bailout program, authorities said Monday.
> NEW YORK -- The former president of a small community bank was  
> arrested on charges that he lied to the federal government to get a  
> piece of the bailout program, authorities said Monday.
> Charles Antonucci Sr. was charged in a criminal complaint filed in  
> U.S. District Court in Manhattan with self-dealing, bank bribery,  
> embezzlement and fraud.
> Authorities said the rip-off targeted the New York State Banking  
> Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Troubled  
> Asset Relief Program.
> Antonucci resigned last year as president of The Park Avenue Bank,  
> which is headquartered in Manhattan with four retail branches in  
> Manhattan and Brooklyn.
> Among other allegations, Antonucci was accused of using false  
> information to request $11 million from the federal government's  
> TARP bank bailout program.
> The complaint accused him of lying to banking authorities in late  
> 2008 and early 2009 to make them believe he had invested $6.5  
> million of his own money in the bank when the money actually  
> belonged to the bank.
> After the application for TARP money was rejected, Antonucci did a  
> media interview in which he said the bank withdrew its application  
> because of "issues" with the TARP program and a desire to avoid  
> "market perception" that bad banks take TARP money, the complaint  
> said.
> Federal authorities say Antonucci actually wanted to obtain millions  
> of dollars for his own use, in part so he could obtain a controlling  
> interest in the bank.
> They said he also permitted a former administrative assistant to  
> obtain $400,000 of loans the assistant was not qualified for. The  
> complaint said the former assistant is now cooperating.
> The complaint alleged that Antonucci later used the former bank  
> employee's private plane on 10 or more occasions, including trips to  
> Phoenix to attend the Super Bowl, to Augusta, Ga., to watch the  
> Master's golf tournament, a flight to Florida to visit a relative  
> and a flight to Panama.
> Antonucci's lawyer, Charles Stillman, said he had just gotten a copy  
> of the charges. He declined immediate comment.
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100316/721cb1f0/attachment-0001.html