tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post8573541545928118357..comments2024-03-29T02:29:03.388-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Three problems for Catholic opponents of capital punishmentEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger141125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-49491620514438709142019-11-20T20:25:06.806-08:002019-11-20T20:25:06.806-08:00Just to clarify the record, Carl Kuss's positi...Just to clarify the record, Carl Kuss's position here would amount to teaching that the death penalty is an intrinsically evil act. Such a teaching would contradict Pope JPII and his teaching in EV and CCC, and Benedict's teaching as well. They both insist that the death penalty is not to be considered as intrinsically evil. Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07159134209092031897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-88385401868308421562019-10-15T13:42:57.317-07:002019-10-15T13:42:57.317-07:00Capital Punishment is worse than murder in the sam...Capital Punishment is worse than murder in the same way that Institutional Abortion is worse than abortion. <br /><br />Capital Punishment, in the proper sense of the word, is like Institutional Abortion, something new and terrible in the history of the world, something which did not previously exist.<br /><br />To confuse abortion with Instituional Abortion is sophistical. It is the sophism of those whos justify their Acquiesescence to Institutional Abortion with expressions like “I am personally opposed to abortion, but…”<br /><br /><br />Institutional Abortion is worse than abortion because it entails more than a simple disordered act, but the establishment of a right and a principle. <br /><br />The legalization of abortion is already an institutionalization that I want no part of, because I stubbornly refuse to bloody my hands.<br /><br /><br />(On the other there are countries such as Germany where one speaks not of legalization, but of de-criminalization. One might naively hold that that amounts to the same thing, but it is not quite the same thing. I might agree with the Church´s teaching in Gaudium et Spes that abortion is an abominable crime, and still not wish to criminalize women who have had abortions, that such an option might be defensible as a prudential judgement and a wise manifestation of mercy within an authentic Culture of Life.)<br /><br /><br />The failure to distinguish between abortion and Institutionalized Abortion manifests a legal positivism that makes no distinction between positive and natural law. <br /><br /><br />St. John Paul II, who strove against this positivism, reminded us that there are such things as structures of sin (such as Institutionalized Abortion, and Such as Capital Punishment) which are not in themselves sins, but are evil and exceedingly evil, and which those persons in charge of the common good are obliged to resist.)<br />Carl Kuss, L.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10348528727574912301noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-6936133283132264142019-09-24T18:20:28.455-07:002019-09-24T18:20:28.455-07:00The Church as never taught that her teachings can ...The Church as never taught that her teachings can "add up" over times by various Popes, as Feser relies on for his position. The reasonable position is that each Pope guides his own flockAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-79064931087135641102019-09-24T17:10:21.914-07:002019-09-24T17:10:21.914-07:00Lonely Professor,
Surely the presumption should b...Lonely Professor,<br /><br />Surely the presumption should be in favor of the Magisterium. Your reasoning can fail horrible in some individual mistakes; is that therefore a reason to be skeptical and think that your reasoning might be habitually failing horribly? No. Atnohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138424784532839636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-7090968704392937972019-09-23T11:02:17.825-07:002019-09-23T11:02:17.825-07:00The term 'death penalty' frightens people....The term 'death penalty' frightens people. Suggest it be changed to 'retro-active abortion' and the same procedures be used (scientists claim there is no pain).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-8706356595120018342019-09-23T06:28:51.961-07:002019-09-23T06:28:51.961-07:00Walter
Like I said your remarks in this
regard do ...Walter<br />Like I said your remarks in this<br />regard do not make a lot of sense then. My point still stands though, what you were describing there looks like a case of retributive punishment.<br /><br />If my claim about self-defense doesn't follow,then yours about abortion etc doesn't follow as either.Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-53409111681726322762019-09-23T05:09:55.689-07:002019-09-23T05:09:55.689-07:00Jeremy
That's exactly my point. It is an obvi...Jeremy<br /><br />That's exactly my point. It is an obvious contradiction. My first post was a reply to this statement by Scott, "I have realized that in order to be consistently pro-life, you have to be pro-capital punishment".<br /><br />That is an obvious contradiction. Maybe nobody else holds this view, but I doubt it, judging by the fact that many pro-lifers take the absolute respect for human life as the basis for their anti-abortion and aniti-euthanasia stance, e.g.Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-86790382977048394332019-09-23T05:02:37.249-07:002019-09-23T05:02:37.249-07:00Red
No, that is not what I have been doing.
And,...Red<br /><br />No, that is not what I have been doing.<br /><br />And, no, you cannot just as well say that self-defense is intentional killing.<br /><br />I think we should leave it here. <br /><br /> Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-78962632445507135162019-09-23T01:03:32.829-07:002019-09-23T01:03:32.829-07:00Walter
"I am not equating someone who does no...Walter<br />"I am not equating someone who does not believe in intrinsic moral wrongness with a psychopath and I have never done so."<br /><br />But that is exactly what you have been doing this entire thread, otherwise I don't know if your comments so far even make sense.<br /><br />"Furthermore, if the death penalty is not intentional killing, then neither is abortion or euthanasia."<br /><br />I have already addressed this point, so just read what I have said above.<br /><br />And I can just as well say that if DP is intentional killing then so is self-defense.<br />problem again is with intentions, there is no contradiction between the doctrines in question.Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-513183521340883272019-09-22T23:50:21.442-07:002019-09-22T23:50:21.442-07:00Walter,
Okay, but that seems like a rather obviou...Walter,<br /><br />Okay, but that seems like a rather obvious contradiction, so few people are likely to explicitly hold both such views. What I am questioning is your insinuation that Catholics must hold that human life must always be preserved. Jeremy Taylornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-23143086405589799892019-09-22T23:18:00.040-07:002019-09-22T23:18:00.040-07:00Tony
If you don't want to discuss this with m...Tony<br /><br />If you don't want to discuss this with me, I respect that, but maybe you sgould let other people make their own decisions.Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-7709060603823777282019-09-22T23:13:50.975-07:002019-09-22T23:13:50.975-07:00Jeremy
The question is whether someone who agrees...Jeremy<br /><br />The question is whether someone who agrees that human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception can also support the death penalty. <br /><br />My answer to that question is a definite "no".<br />No, agian, if you have an actual argument against my position, I am all ears, but it appears you don't have one, so i am going to bow out of this discussion.Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-50009140811461245492019-09-22T14:48:45.233-07:002019-09-22T14:48:45.233-07:00Walter,
For Francis to have not overlooked the po...Walter,<br /><br />For Francis to have not overlooked the point you are making, he would have had to appeal to those words in the catechism as authority, as you are doing, with the same interpretation as you give. That's not what you are describing him doing.<br /><br />You ignored my further points. What about the evidence Feser has gathered that the Church has consistently taught the licit nature of the death penalty for two millennia? Also, what doctrinal authority do you believe the passage from the catechism has, even if we accept your interpretation (which is a big if)?<br /><br />Tony,<br /><br />Yes, this whole sub-discussion does seem rather silly. Apparently Feser overlooked something so obvious.Jeremy Taylornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-60301663061556967172019-09-22T13:27:21.867-07:002019-09-22T13:27:21.867-07:00But if one uses absolute respect for human life as...<i>But if one uses absolute respect for human life as a basis for opposing abortion, one cannot be pro-captital punishment.</i> <br /><br />I am not going to get involved in this particular debate, but I just want to point out a clarification. For those who have not run into Walter on this topic, his interpretation of "absolute" here is so comprehensive and so extreme that according to his understanding, it would be wrong for <i>God Himself</i> to directly take the life of a human being. Yes, that sense of "absolute". <br /><br />He has (in my past discussions with him) shown no willingness to consider <i>any other sense</i> of absolute than this sense, even if it were proposed by the Catholic Church in, say the CCC. Hence he cannot be persuaded to another stance. For example, he is unwilling to consider that if the CCC itself lays out the "absolute" term in one paragraph, and in another paragraph only a dozen or two away it infers some other result that is contradictory to HIS idea of "absolute", that this amounts to the Church <i>refining and qualifying</i> what it meant by "absolute. <br /><br />As a result of this intransigence, I have sworn off discussing life issues with him. Your mileage may vary, but you should at least know what you're getting into. Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07159134209092031897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-16777342655047524922019-09-22T12:02:08.136-07:002019-09-22T12:02:08.136-07:00Walter, you have indeed said quite a lot...but, IM...Walter, you have indeed said quite a lot...but, IMHO, your arguments are not at all persuasive. More specifically, you have skated around the obvious distinction between an innocent human life, and one who is guilty, having committed grave offenses within and against the body politic.<br /><br />If Capital Punishment is intrinsically evil, or perhaps has become absolutely prohibited under the New Covenant...then how do you explain/reconcile the inspired words of St. Paul in Romans 13:1-4:<br />----------<br />"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the SWORD in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer."<br />Tritiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09898318643029403042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-88613965062209339082019-09-22T11:31:20.099-07:002019-09-22T11:31:20.099-07:00Red
I am not equating someone who does not believ...Red<br /><br />I am not equating someone who does not believe in intrinsic moral wrongness with a psychopath and I have never done so. <br /><br />Furthermore, if the death penalty is not intentional killing, then neither is abortion or euthanasia.<br /><br />Scott<br /> <br /><br />I have said all I wanted to say and my argument is that claiming that human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception contradicts the use of the DP, regardless of whether retributive justice is legitimate. Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-83364873923879481592019-09-22T10:26:41.158-07:002019-09-22T10:26:41.158-07:00You can have a last word if you like. I will refra...You can have a last word if you like. I will refrain from responding any further.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00481589239954065668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-15817034135642880892019-09-22T10:25:50.439-07:002019-09-22T10:25:50.439-07:00Walter,
I guess we can leave it there. But retrib...Walter,<br /><br />I guess we can leave it there. But retributive justice is relevant because capital punishment is a special case of retributive justice. If you do not accept retributive justice, there is no way to accept capital punishment. Otherwise you have to say that it is okay to kill anyone who is a potential danger, which could be anyone. So I would argue that if retributive justice is immoral and bogus, you are 100% correct. If the Church had no understanding about retributive justice, you would be correctly interpreting its teaching.<br /><br />But that is not and has never been the case. See Dr. Feser’s book for details.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00481589239954065668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-85056705605017596502019-09-22T10:18:41.883-07:002019-09-22T10:18:41.883-07:00Walter.
I did just that in my first post here, we ...Walter.<br />I did just that in my first post here, we are discussing what follows from those remarks.<br /><br />whether the case corresponds to real life is irrelevent. We are just testing moral intuitions here. Also note that although it would be very rare, such case isn't physically immposibble.<br /><br />And most importantly, I don't know why are you equating the person in the case, someone who doesn't believe in intrinsic moral wrongness with a psychopath. If you were in charge many brilliant ethicists would be in gaol right now.Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-62149754521678922162019-09-22T09:01:53.487-07:002019-09-22T09:01:53.487-07:00Scott
See my reply to Red. He doesn't have to...Scott<br /><br />See my reply to Red. He doesn't have to think rape is intrinsically evil, but if he sees no need to apologize, he is a psychopath. That has nothing to do with moral relativism.<br /><br />Anyway, I do not want to defend my view on retributive justice here any further because it is way off topic.<br /><br />If anyone has anything to say about my actual argument, feel free to do so and I may reply if I think there is anything substantial. But I am not going to repeat myself ad infinitum.Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-19776551786327695212019-09-22T08:57:46.566-07:002019-09-22T08:57:46.566-07:00Red
I don't see how denying that the death pe...Red<br /><br />I don't see how denying that the death penalty is intentional killing of a human being is even possible. If you want to argue for that position, then be my guest, but you'll have to make a very strong case.<br />The point about psychopaths is that being a psychopath is necessarily a threat to society. <br />Scott's case does not correspond to a real life possiblity, because, unless you are God, you cannot rule out that there can be negative consequences.<br />Anyway, as I told Scott, this is not about retributive justice, so i am not going to discuss it any further.<br />Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-83452246263897643662019-09-22T07:20:20.351-07:002019-09-22T07:20:20.351-07:00Walter,
Is it treatment against his will? Then th...Walter,<br /><br />Is it treatment against his will? Then that is retribution. People are allowed to have private opinions if they are not using them to harm people (in the future). There are lots of people who believe in moral relativism who are not in immediate danger of committing crimes.<br /><br />Do you think we should lock all of these people away in mental institutions? Also, I do not know if you can get committed to a mental institution for an earnest philosophical worldview if you show no other signs of mental illness.<br /><br />He also may not be a psychopath. Perhaps he feels extreme empathy and sadness when he sees the puppy commercials with Sarah McLaughlin.<br /><br />He just does not think rape is intrinsically evil because he is a relativist.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00481589239954065668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-51824449529046420632019-09-22T07:19:41.380-07:002019-09-22T07:19:41.380-07:00Walter
What is it treatment for if there really ar...Walter<br />What is it treatment for if there really aren't particular negative consequences in the case in the first place?<br />I take retribution to be punishment,like imprisonment for the sake of duty rather than preventing harm.. that is why that looks like retribution.<br /><br />What do you think I haven't provided argument for?<br />My point was that the two doctrines in question aren't contradictory, then I pointed out that whatever problems you have with my remarks are related to the notion of intention not that there is a contradiction after all.Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-13614961335734479612019-09-22T06:21:58.363-07:002019-09-22T06:21:58.363-07:00Jeremy
I really don't care why people "o...Jeremy<br /><br />I really don't care why people "overlook an obvious and easy objection". I care whether they have a counterargument or not. So far, I haven't seen any, but I am open to the possibility that someone might come up with one. So, I am not resting on my laurels.<br />But I have one advantage ver a Catholic. I have the incredibly comfortable position of free investigations without the restriction that the Catholic Curch must always be right.<br />BTW, I don't think Feser's opponents have overlooked so easy a refutation. The appeal by pope Francis to the absoluteness of human dignity certainly comes close. But, the Pope is a Catholic and ha sto be very careful. Thank God I don't.Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-2058626342469115422019-09-22T06:13:18.047-07:002019-09-22T06:13:18.047-07:00Red
It may sound like retribution to you, but it ...Red<br /><br />It may sound like retribution to you, but it isn't. It's called treatment.<br />For the rest, I deal with arguments, not with assertions.<br /><br />Walter Van den Ackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101735542155226072noreply@blogger.com