Capital Punishment argue: Primoratz & Nathanson

1st 5-6 Page Paper

Due Monday September 30th by 11:59 PM

Write a 5-6 page critical essay that addresses the prompt below. Your paper should not only

exposit the relevant arguments from the text along with appropriate evidence and citations, but

also you are required to provide some critical evaluation. The difficulty will be in limiting what

you include to those arguments relevant to answering the question. Be concise so that you can

include everything necessary within the page limit.

You may use whatever citation style you’re comfortable with, just be consistent throughout the

paper. If you use outside sources (which is not required), make sure to cite them properly in

your paper.

Prompt:

Our first major topic was Capital Punishment. Begin by explaining the positions of the two

authors (Primoratz & Nathanson). Be sure to explain the major factors each author thinks

justifies their position on capital punishment.

Go on to argue whose position you find more convincing, and explain why. If you find neither

position convincing, develop some foundations for your own view, but be sure to explain what

problems your own view solves that the previous views do not.

Finally, apply your position to a new criminal justice topic of your choice, and explain how

your position could give insight on how to address your chosen topic. What you should be

thinking about and explaining here is how your chosen theoretical commitments on capital

punishment apply to a different topic.

To summarize, your paper must include the following features:

(1) Exposit each author’s general position, their specific arguments, and identify where it is the two authors disagree.

(2) Argue for whose position you find more convincing, and explain why. Alternatively, develop your own position.

(3) Apply your position from (2) to a new criminal justice topic of your choice. You should explain how your position could give insight on how to address your chosen topic.

(4) OPTIONAL: If you find you’re under the page requirement you can always consider objections to your own view, but explain why they are not conclusive.