IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v5y2016i2p25-d71309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Death Penalty and Human Dignity: An Existential Fallacy

Author

Listed:
  • Susan Nagelsen

    (Writing Department, Curry College, Milton, MA 02186, USA)

  • Charles Huckelbury

    (Independent scholar, Henniker, NH 03242, USA)

Abstract

Proponents of capital punishment in the United States frequently cite the evolution from electrocution and hanging to lethal injection as an indication that the evolving standards of decency exhibited by such a transition demonstrate a respect for human dignity. This essay examines that claim by evaluating two standards for assessing whether an act comports with accepted definitions of human dignity: a personal-achievement model, based on work by economist Amartya Sen of Harvard University, and a universal and intrinsic approach to human dignity articulated by criminologist Robert Johnson of the American University. We evaluate Sen’s capabilities model through the lens of a condemned prisoner’s ability to achieve self-defined goals. We then assess Johnson’s claim that preserving human dignity requires an elimination of the death penalty, irrespective of any prisoner’s ability to lead a restricted, albeit goal-directed, existence.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan Nagelsen & Charles Huckelbury, 2016. "The Death Penalty and Human Dignity: An Existential Fallacy," Laws, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-5, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:5:y:2016:i:2:p:25-:d:71309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/5/2/25/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/5/2/25/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S. Charusheela, 2009. "Social analysis and the capabilities approach: a limit to Martha Nussbaum's universalist ethics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 1135-1152, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ingrid Harvold Kvangraven & Surbhi Kesar, 2021. "Standing in the Way of Rigor? Economics’ Meeting with the Decolonizing Agenda," Working Papers 2110, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    2. Nisrine Mansour, 2013. "Gender, well-being and civil society," Chapters, in: Deborah M. Figart & Tonia L. Warnecke (ed.), Handbook of Research on Gender and Economic Life, chapter 4, pages 46-61, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. S. Charusheela, 2013. "Intersectionality," Chapters, in: Deborah M. Figart & Tonia L. Warnecke (ed.), Handbook of Research on Gender and Economic Life, chapter 3, pages 32-45, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Drucilla K. Barker, 2013. "Feminist economics as a theory and method," Chapters, in: Deborah M. Figart & Tonia L. Warnecke (ed.), Handbook of Research on Gender and Economic Life, chapter 2, pages 18-31, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:5:y:2016:i:2:p:25-:d:71309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.