rewind
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
Sunday, April 27, 2008
10:33 AM
Do you agree with the author that there is always a tendency to confuse punishment with revenge?
In society, we are assured of justice, carried out by the judiciary system. We see this happening in our daily lives, when criminals are imprisoned or given the death sentence. Criminals are punished under the judiciary system as a penalty for infringement of law. Revenge, on the other hand, is not carried out lawfully. Instead, it is unjust punishment given by the person involved (or on the behalf of the person involved) due to injustice done to that person, “generally the result of hatred rather than justice”. I agree with the author that there is always a tendency to confuse punishment with revenge.
There are two types of revenge, one of which happens due to a person seeking who feel that what he is doing is giving punishment due to a hurt inflicted on him. It is a form of retaliation, similar to the concept of “an eye for an eye”. Although the person has sufficient reason to take vengeance, he or she might even break the law in their bid to do so, resulting in themselves being convicted. In this case, revenge is personal, unlike punishment by authorities, where there is a certain set of procedures to follow. Both ideas have a common goal, which is to seek retribution.
The second type of revenge would be harder to differentiate from punishment. It is when revenge is not carried out by the person involved, but rather, by those permitted to exact punishment, who may also do so unconsciously. Judges may met out more severe punishments due to their own perception or personal experiences. One judge might think that the punishment given is what the criminal deserve while another may feel that is too light. The boundaries between justified punishment and unjust punishment cannot be clearly defined. In other words, revenge is subjective, justice is objective.
Humans are generally rational creatures, however there are exceptions: when anger triggers irrational behaviour as response to being hurt, or when past experiences clouds our judgement. It is inevitable then, that there is a tendency to confuse revenge with punishment.
How effective are harsh methods when dealing with criminals?
I personally feel that harsh methods are only effective to a certain extent. In my opinion, the effectiveness of harsh methods is due to the motive behind this punishment in the first place.
Harsh methods may include death, torture, life imprisonment or other forms of punishment such as extended prison sentence. As mentioned above, the effectiveness of harsh methods when dealing with criminals is evaluated by the objective of the punishment. For instance in capital punishment, where the objective of such a decision is to ensure that a criminal does not cause harm to the society, it is largely effective, as a dead person certainly can no longer commit crimes.
When the objective of harsh methods when dealing with criminal is that of deterrence, it would be much more difficult to evaluate its effectiveness.
People would rationally weigh the benefits of committing a crime against the effects of the punishments, so in theory, harsh methods are effective in deterring would-be criminals. However, even though the knowledge of harsh methods may cause a criminal to think twice before committing the same crime, it cannot extinguish the thought completely. Harsh methods would then only have limited effectiveness.
Moreover in real life, the case would not be that simple. Serious crimes such as murder are often committed in a fit of rage, where a spur of the moment irrational behaviour might cause them to commit crimes they would regret after the initial anger has wore off. Understandably, the knowledge of harsh methods they would face if they commit the crime would not occur to them at that moment. By the time they ponder the consequence of their action, it may be too late. The objective of deterrence dealing with crime would not be met.
In conclusion, I feel that the effectiveness of harsh method when dealing with criminals is subjected to many other factors and not something easily proven or tracked. Hence, the effectiveness of harsh methods used is only to some extent.