As related earlier, catharsis aims to elicit pity and fear in order to purge such emotions from the audience. As such, the tragic hero’s punishment must not be considered entirely deserved otherwise it would be seen as justice and the cathartic effect would not take place. Instead, the punishment must be somewhat excessive so that pities the tragic hero for his misfortune as well as fears for their own lives after seeing the world is not always fair. However, in order to confirm that Oedipus’ punishment exceeds his crime, both must be identified. Oedipus’ crime is quite simply his attempt to escape his own fate.
The flaws in the death penalty make the act even more horrible. Throughout the history of the death penalty, one can see it as a scream for justice, even though it is morally wrong as humans to play are playing God to one another. A society that is against killing and respects life should not purposefully kill another human being. Societal expectations are that one must have the correct morals intact that fit the norms of society. Regardless of these expectations, the government still denies that, ”An execution is a violent public spectacle of official homicide, and one that endorses killing to solve social problems” (ACLU).
A controversial practice that invokes a debate over how beneficial its intentions are is the use of euthanasia. The argument switches between whether or not putting terminally ill patients to death with the assistance of a physician is justifiable and right. Legalizing the practice of euthanasia is a significant topic among many people in society, including doctors and nurses in the medical field, as it forces people to decide where to draw the line between relieving pain and simply killing. While some people see euthanasia as a way to helping a patient by eliminating their pain, it is completely rejected by others who see it as a method of killing. The word euthanasia is usually looked at with one of two completely different perspectives.
Among the most controversial dilemmas broadly under debate is the Euthanasia and Patient Assisted Suicide (PAS) due to spreading of these practices even when laws are approved in limited states of United States and countries. The Euthanasia has always being part of our society since this word is derived from ancient Greek. The ancient Greek defined Euthanasia as the “well” or “good” death. The PAS is when a physician assist patient to commit suicide or facilitate death. It means that doctor and patient know and intentionally consent to give and receive a dose to end life mainly driven by a terminal and painful illness.
Deliberately, right to die; a controversial issue recently has been heated up and brought to life the pros and cons of mercy killing. Law poses many problems in this regard, mostly because it often comes into contradiction with morality. One of the most fundamental problems arising out of this conflict between law and morality is right to die.
As of 2006, euthanasia is the most dynamic range of exploration in contemporary bioethics. In a few nations there is a divisive open discussion over the ethical, moral, and legitimate issues of euthanasia. The individuals who are against euthanasia may contend for the holiness of life, while defenders of euthanasia rights accentuate mitigating enduring, substantial respectability, determination toward oneself, and individual autonomy. Jurisdictions where euthanasia or supported suicide is legitimate incorporate the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Estonia, Albania, and the US states of Washington. CLASSIFICATION OF EUTHANASIA Euthanasia may be characterized consistent with if an individual
"Moral desert" is just a philosophical notion that a person deserves something based on his or her actions, and it is not cleared up by equality retributivism because equality retributivism calls for us to "behave barbarically to those who are guilty of barbaric crimes" (Nathanson). Another example of this is imagine a rapist. It would be barbaric and morally unacceptable to rape the rapist. Even though it may seem that those who kill should be killed themselves, it really isn't moral and is not universally
Euthanasia enables individuals to make a tough decision, but a decision that should be up to an individual to make; whether a terminally ill individual wants to die should be their decision without an outsider’s input. Euthanasia gives a terminally ill individual the opportunity to end the misery they feel they are in. As human beings, we are constantly expected to make decisions for ourselves. If an individual wants to die, it should be their decision and
The fear of being judged in this society and the fear of breaking some rule buried deep down is always present at the back of our minds. Freedom states complete independence, but our society has trimmed its ends. Which, agreed, is necessary to live peacefully. A thing like cannibalism isn’t acceptable and here freedom to do anything must be curbed. But is the extent of cutting off freedom going too far?
We live in a world that has opposing viewpoints on this subject; there are those who view it as homicide, and others who view it as the most sincere form of human compassion. So I implore you, not to look at euthanasia as a choice between life and death, but a choice between peace and misery. Dying is not a