Take and defend a position on the defensibility of the death penalty.

Philosophy of Law PAPER INSTRUCTION Assignment Desсrіption / Topics: Take and defend a position on the defensibility of the death penalty. Present at least two arguments in support of your position. Then develop as many counter-arguments as you can. Rebut them, consider replies, rebut these, and so on. You will want to consider at least some of the following: retributive retentionist arguments; utilitarian retentionist arguments; utilitarian abolitionist arguments; and abolitionist arguments from civilization, brutalization, irrevocability, mistake, caprice, and bias. Draw extensively upon Jeffrey Reiman, Ernest van den Haag, Stephen Nathanson and the opinions in Furman v. Georgia, Gregg v. Georgia, and McCleskey v. Kemp. REQUIRED CLASS READINGS AND VIDEO LECTURES Required Readings (All provided/attached): • Furman v. Georgia • Gregg v. Georgia • Stephen Nathanson, ″Does it Matter if the Death Penalty is Arbitrarily Administered?″ • McCleskey v. Kemp • Jeffrey Reiman – Justice, Civilization, and the Death Penalty • Ernest Van den Haag – The Collapse of the Case Against Capital Punishment Required Video Lectures: • Lecture: Capital Punishment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝0d3I-rWwyxw • Lecture: Abolition https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue＝3&v＝9adEk5C-c-s • Lecture: Racial Bias https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝rv_7aa77i9A • Lecture: Legal Causation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝TjEQU2mTG70 • Video Clip: Palsgraf Lego https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝mDEbTudkjhc • Lecture: Responsibility for Results https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝qRaS4cU2nlE • Lecture: Duty to Rescue https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝ZiI7YhhuFqQ • Lecture: Mental States and Strict Liability https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝vYDJyB2A_2w • Lecture: Constitutional Interpretation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v＝Q1BSLuT0fOk Grading Rubric Highest Possible Score: 5/5 Approximate correlations: 5.0＝A; 4.6＝A-; 4.2＝B+; 3.8＝B; 3.4＝B-; 3.0＝C+; 2.6＝C; 2.2＝C-; 1.8＝D+; 1.4＝D; 1.0＝D-; 0.6＝F 1) Argumentation: Appropriate development of one’s own arguments and appropriate consideration of counterarguments 6 pts. a. Originality 2 pts. 2: Student presents theses, arguments, and objections that are not readily derivable from the assigned readings or discussions with others. 1: Theses, arguments, and objections presented are partially derivable from the assigned readings or discussions with others. 0: Theses, arguments, and objections presented are entirely derivable from the assigned readings or discussions with others. b. Persuasiveness of Argument 4 pts. 4: Student presents arguments that are highly persuasive. Both obvious and non-obvious objections are effectively addressed. 3: Arguments presented are somewhat persuasive. Some objections are addressed and with some effectiveness. 2: Arguments presented are somewhat persuasive, but even obvious objections are ignored or presented ineffectively. 1: Arguments presented are fallacious or no objections are considered. 0: Thesis is asserted but not supported with argument. 2) Sources: comprehension and effective engagement 3.5 pts. 3.5: Paper demonstrates excellent comprehension of assigned sources and engages them effectively. 2: Paper demonstrates moderate, but not excellent, comprehension of assigned sources and engages them somewhat effectively. 1: Paper demonstrates only minimal comprehension and/or engagement with assigned sources. 0: Paper demonstrates no comprehension or engagement with assigned sources. 3) Writing: Expression and Organization of Ideas 4 pts. a) Paper is well-written 2 pts. 2: Paper is as clearly written as the subject matter allows. It is succinct, precise, grammatical, and properly punctuated. It uses appropriate vocabulary, including technical terms when useful. 1: Paper could be written more clearly, given the subject matter. It may be to some degree verbose, imprecise, ungrammatical, and/or improperly punctuated. It may not consistently use appropriate vocabulary. It may overuse or misuse technical terms. 0: Paper is so poorly written that it cannot be understood. It may be highly verbose, imprecise, ungrammatical, and/or improperly punctuated. It may not use vocabulary appropriately. b) Paper is well-structured 2 pt. 2: The sections of the paper are ordered so as to facilitate a natural progression of ideas, as are paragraphs within sections and sentences within paragraphs. 1: The sections, paragraphs, and/or sentences of the paper are not consistently ordered so as to facilitate a natural progression of ideas. 0: The paper is severely disorganized. The sections, paragraphs, and/or sentences do not facilitate a natural progression of ideas.