Grayling brings philosophy to life

As I mentioned in an earlier post on my literary endeavors, I just recently got my hands on a 200-page book full of short essays by philosopher and commentator A.C. Grayling.

The topics covered are listed in this Wikipedia article. The essays are not only philosophically and ethically relevant, but resonate personally. On several occasions I've found myself applying what was reflected in, say, the essay on "moralizing", to something that I was experiencing or thinking about. One thing is sure: the book raises more questions than it answers. Perhaps that is a measure of a good (philosophy) book. Personal reflection — not just pure rationale — is needed for one to truly embark on a journey of philosophical thought and experience.

Out of the few professional reviews of this book, the philosophy expert at About.com sure liked the book, although I hardly warrant that as a true book review (he seems to give five stars or other generous ratings to nearly any book). The book has two editions: one, entitled Meditations for the Humanist: Ethics for a Secular Age, is its American edition; and The Meaning of Things: Applying Philosophy to Life — a far better title, in my opinion — is the title for the British edition. It is a fairly cheap book — but worth far beyond what is printed on the price tag. If you're interested, or just in the mood for not-too-heavy, general philosophical thought, I recommend you purchase this book.

Ethics in America: lethal injection under scrutiny; punishment and religion

I have already stated my opinion on the death penalty. Are the efforts in Florida and California to put a hold on lethal injections capital punishment a turning point in that aspect of human rights in American commonly ignored? Are these judges and others using the lethal injection label of 'inhumane' as a way to get rid of the death penalty once and for all? Shall the death penalty be stopped in those two states vis a vis the specific argument against the death by lethal injection? — we will see.

Executions by lethal injection were suspended in Florida and ordered revamped in California on Friday, as the chemical method once billed as a more humane way of killing the condemned came under mounting scrutiny over the pain it may cause.

If the chemically-initiated killing process is ruled definitely as crossing the boundaries into "cruel and unusual" — which the death penalty already is — then what next? Firing squads (still used some today), electric chair, hanging [by rope, etc.], and things like forced drowning have all been used to enforce the death penalty in the past, and if lethal injection is gone, than what other methods still exist? Will those be as 'humane'? The irony is that those being put to death by the state are going to die no matter what method is used, death is death. I guess society wants to feel better by saying we gave them the best death possible — an excuse (the process for the killing) for the act (the state killing). I just wish public debate will be sparked at least a bit in America over this news, even though chances are it will be far from intelligent, rational debate. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth would leave everyone blind and toothless. Vengeance breeds vengeance; vengeance is not as much as a deterrant as the act of revenge and personal/societal justice that outweighs it. Hopefully reason will prevail — eventually — in the US. Just my usual two cents.

Let's hopefully — in public discourse on capital punishment — focus less on the method of putting the person to death, and more on the act of the state killing someone as a punishment. After all, the judicial process is more for rehabilitation than punishment. And, if one argues the flawed (to say the least) argument that punishment is greater than rehabilitation into proper society, then I might expect that person to be against the death penalty. I would rather die than spend the rest of my life, tens and tens of years, in a concrete and steel holding cell.

The United States is the only developed nation to use the death penalty as a method of punishment. The United States is one of five countries that puts to death people under 18. Bodies such as the European Union and the United Nations have spoken against capital punishment and have strong treaties and laws against it — especially in the case of the EU (which makes sense because Europe's political climate is more to the center than America's relatively conservative-leaning politik).


Still sick; I hope to be better later this week. I have had time, however, to read up on some philosophy, and plan to have more philosophy-related posts soon. I have especially been reading up on my favourite philosopher, John Stuart Mill, who — from what we know — is pro-death penalty (according to a speech he gave). If Mill did believe in the death penalty, then he was wrong. If he changed his mind as he aged and developed views independent of his father's (James Mill) and godfather (Bentham) about the death penalty, then that's good. Of course, as I explain below, times change. One might say that the religion — it's really ideology but bare with me, spirituality plays into the next topic of this post — of Mill was utilitarianism. Not only did Mill's views develop, but so did utilitarianism — which he moved a bit more away from as he grew older.

The Bible, Torah, and Koran all speak for and against the penalty of death, and all say things like killing the nonbelievers or stoning women or homosexuals, etc. In the time these religious texts were written, the death penalty might have — like dictatorships and monarchies (for stability's sake back then) — make more sense then than now. A mix of ignorance or knowledge and just the situation of the times shape the relative relation between what those thousands of years old texts say. Through out those many years, the Bible, for example, has been so modified and was already questionable in the first place that its spiritual messages, let along its historical merit, are highly questionable.

I usually do not quote television scripts, but here is a bit from an episode of The West Wing relating to the death penalty

RABBI GLASSMAN: You know what it (the Torah) also says? It says a rebellious child can be brought to the city gates and stoned to death. It says homosexuality is an abomination and punishable by death. It says men can be polygamous and slavery is acceptable. For all I know, that thinking reflected the best wisdom of its time, but it’s just plain wrong by any modern standard. Society has a right to protect itself, but it doesn’t have a right to be vengeful. It has a right to punish, but it doesn’t have to kill.

That's why I love that show.

technorati tags: law, legal, california, florida, united+states, usa, justice, judicial, capital+punishment, death+penalty, society, ethics, philosophy, european+union, united+nations, lethal+injection, us, punishment, crime, judge, news, in+the+news, current+affairs, in+perspective, clearthought, politics, personal, opinion, blog, blogging, human+rights, philosophy, js+mill, john+stuart+mill, the+west+wing, television, religion

Stem cells in the US, part 1

See post on stem cells and cloned food.
See also this post on the stem cell wars between ideologues and normal people.

From a BBC News Q&A article on the United States and stem cells:

There are religious and social conservatives who oppose abortion and consequently the destruction of embryos required for stem cell research. Many of these are also supporters of Mr Bush.

This junk from the large group of social American conservatives is largely false. Scientists have found that they can do stem cell research without the risk of cloning or injuring a potential baby, yet most of these people have still refused to accept any form of stem cell research or treatment. Bottom line: the majority of staunch American partisans and conservatives are closed-minded and won't go by any of the facts, only the fantasies and fallacies they create in their quasi-moral (e.g. supporting torture of "enemy combatants"; no consented death for those with terminal illnesses?) politic.


technorati tags: stem+cell, stem+cells, united+states, religious+right, christian, conservative, social+conservatives, science, politics, ethics, biology, biotech, technology, commentary, in+perspective, clearthought, news, current, bush

Saddam death sentence follow-up

A follow-up to this post.
On again, off again (but mostly on again) Neocon writer Christopher Hitchens seems to agree with most of my opinions on the death penalty expressed in my Saddam Hussein verdict post in this Slate article — which focuses much on the Kurds in Iraq. See also a "tribute", or history (per se), of the Iraqi dictator written by David Cox on Guardian Unlimited's Comment is Free. Also, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that he does not agree with the use of the death penalty, even for the genocidal Saddam Hussein.

technorati tags: saddam, saddam+hussein, hitchens, cox, comment+is+free, news, politics, world, commentary, opinion, article, post, neocon, slate, guardian+unlimited, iraq, death+penalty, saddam+trial+verdict, in+the+news, current+affairs, blogger, blogging, blog, weblog, clearthough, in+perspective, follow-uptony+blair, blair, UK, united+kingdom, genocide, kurds, kurdish, capital+punishment

Case closed (?): Saddam Hussein sentenced

This relates to the situation in Iraq, and is a supplement to the "Iraq situation" series.
The biggest trial since Michael Jackson's, the trial of Saddam Hussein has finally come to a halt. In this trial, evidence was presented on charges of crimes against humanity.

Former --Iraqi (posts)-- leader Saddam Hussein (profile), along with two co-defendants, has been sentenced to death by hanging, the Baghdad-based Iraqi High Tribunal has ruled. Among those happy are US officials (US midterm elections are only a few days away), Shias (including predominately Shia nations such as Iran), Kurds, and others oppressed under the dictator's decades-long rule that ended with the United States-led coalition invasion in 2003. Those who are disgruntled by the death sentence include some human rights groups, people/bodies who/that recognize the human right to life (including the EU), supporters of Saddam and other — but not all — Sunnis.

This BBC article summarizes this latest event well:

The former Iraqi leader was convicted over the killing of 148 people in the mainly Shia town of Dujail following an assassination attempt on him in 1982.

US President George W Bush said the verdict was a "milestone" for Iraq but the EU urged it not to execute him.

The capture of Saddam, and this trial, really will ultimately not matter much in Iraq's history — as much (while the toppling of Saddam does certainly warrant the label of 'milestone') as President Bush and Neoconservatives would like to Americans to believe. However, the trial will probably play into the hands of the GOP. It is no coincidence that the ruling came today, two days before US midterms. United States Vice President Dick Chaney had recently — more than ever — pushed for a verdict soon before the elections, and he was not the only White House or Republican figure pushing for such a timely ruling on a matter that engrosses so many of the headlines and issue lists. The main question is whether this ruling will change the minds of potential voters or if voters will even see it as connected to the central issue of the war in Iraq.

This trial has been marred by many questionable judicial rulings and the alleged (when you have defense lawyers being killed all of the time and the justice system doing nothing about it, I would call it a questionable trial) stripping of basic trial rights. These characteristics of this roller coaster ride of a trial seem to have shown that a fair trial was not given to Saddam in a country that can only hesitantly be called a democracy (e.g. free press)

It is not like Saddam — and us watching on the sidelines — did not see this coming, it is the way the trial went about and the method of punishment that disgruntles me. Not only does the ruling of penalty of death almost certainly elevate sectarian violence, but the death penalty shows even more that Iraqi justice is questionable to human rights standards. Capital punishment is inhumane (and uncivilized), in face the US is the only truly developed country that still [readily] uses it. That eye for a an eye, tooth for a tooth mentality should be long gone... I mean, who wants to be blind and toothless?

See my views on withdraw of foreign troops from Iraq.

technorati tags: iraq, bush, war, saddam, hussein, saddam+hussein, iraqi, death+penalty, hang, handing, civil, human+rights, capital+punishment, justice, legal, eye+for+an+eye, withdraw, US, usa, president+bush, news, in+the+news, in+perspective, clearthought, politics, international, united+states, 2003, invasion, war, iraq+war, trial, EU, sunni, shia, sectarian, opinion, commentary, current+affairs, elections, 2006, midterm, election, gop, chaney, republicans

My opinion on the death penalty

The death penalty in American society...

It is my belief that capital punishment is not a punishment for civilized nations and has many flaws, meaning many innocent people are executed. There is a great hypocrisy to the death penalty too. If you kill someone, does than mean you should be killed? I think not. If our society acted in that way there would be many problems. The United States is the only 'developed' country that still uses the death penalty. What does that tell you?

Capital punishment is brought upon only some individuals. There are those murderous who have mental problems, had a horrible and traumatizing life, and some who got caught up in the heat of the moment. There is no truly "bad" person, only people we consider sociopaths, psychotic, or other variants of non-mainstream mental factors. We should have better correctional facilities and help for those with mental problems and horrible lives (poverty, childhood abuse, etc.). One that is a minority (race wise) is more than 10 times more likely to be executed for the same crime as a person (not of a minority) committed in the US.

I have trouble understanding how the United States of America, out of all developed nations in our world, feels the need to use the costly and inhumane death penalty. The United States Constitution's Eighth Amendment protects against 'cruel and unusual punishment'. The European Union and the United Nations (as well as other respected multi- and international bodies) have ruled that the death penalty is stampeding on human rights, and is obviously cruel. Notice I said costly, it is true that the death penalty on a person is more expensive than having them in a correctional facility for their life or sentence. Another problem is that there is no way to know certain factory about the person, such as whether they have some hidden mental problems or had horrible abuse in their childhood that traumatized them for the rest of their life. These two features show up, along with poverty and peer pressure crimes, many times in homicide and other high felony cases. Socioeconomic factors are often supreme in the case of someone on death row.

I believe the death penalty is not only wrong, but legally troubling. Is it right to take the life of a person just because they took other lives? In all cases: no. Some people can be made to be working members of society, some can not, but that does not mean they should be given the shot of death. If the goal of punishment for law-breaking is to punish then rehabilitate a law-breaker into society, then the death penalty and other extreme punishments — as well as the criminal justice systems of the United States and other nations — have failed that principle of law and order in a civilized society. The Danish penal system may be worth a look at.

A penalty of death is neither moral nor ethical to the parties to it, society in general, and humankind as a whole.

More (e.g. references, additional views) soon...
Modified on 8 October 2006.

technorati tags: death+penalty, penal, justice, crime, law+and+order, society, usa, eu, moral, ethical, ethics, european+union, united+states, denmark, prison, capital+punishment, opinion, blog, law, un, united+nations, human+rights, legal, punishment, crime, politics, government