Political efficacy is described as, “Faith and trust in government and the belief that one can understand and influence political affairs” (Mutz and reeves). The dearth of political efficacy is reflected in the mobilization numbers of the 2014 senate races. According to the Pew Research Center, only 38% of the voting-eligible population in states with senate elections turned out (Desilver & Van Kessel, 2015). Pew finds that it was the lowest turnout since 1990 even though $1.1 billion was spent, 25% more than the 2010 election (Desilver & Van Kessel, 2015). To be clear, the two numbers do not necessarily indicate causation, and there could be several other factors attributed.
They want to make sure when punishing an immoral act, there is benefit to society. Shaw says this because utilitarianism does give established laws and reasoning behind them. Shaw also says that Utilitarians say that our system of punishment as it functions, succeeds in rehabilitating many convicts and discourages them from future mistakes. his reasons for saying this. I think that Utilitarians favor exploring the alternatives because doing something to someone, even a criminal, who has committed a heinous crime, morally wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right, it is setting the wrong view for society.
Is lying that big of a deal? When it comes to lying everyone will argue that it 's either bad or good depending on the situation. One major question being asked is "Is it better to lie to get out of trouble than to tell the truth? " I am a strong advocate when it comes to lying to protect yourself from dangers and trouble. Of course, everything depends on certain situations, but if permitted, like the common phrase goes "gotta do what you gotta do" and if that means lying to save your ass then I say why not.
Now, more than ever, Trump is using this philosophy to promote himself (Healy). The candidate has taken in little money so far; he raised less than $2 million to this point. He also has not spent much, around $1.5 million (Inside Gov). Conversely, his opponent spent over $3 million and raised, just shy of, $12 million. The Super Pac and other organizations have raise a combined total of more than $105 million to support Bush.
Most people would say lying and deceit are always wrong, unless there is a good reason behind it. One can conclude that this means that lying and deceit are not always blatantly wrong. Lying qualifies as a form of deception, but not all forms of deception qualify as lies. Why is lying
This point of view makes sense since, as I said earlier, there are 100 million people that have not voted in the last election, this means that around 40 percent of those eligible to vote, do not. We are missing a huge gap in our societies opinions. However according to text 2 “Countries such as Venezuela and the Netherlands practised compulsory voting at one time but have since abolished it”. This means that there are countries that have tried it in the past, and it did not work. Lastly, since 100 million people vote the majority reason that people do not vote, do not vote because they do not have the knowledge for an educated answer.
In The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Reverend Dimmesdale experiences a distressing situation where his ability to make the correct choice is tested. The choice that haunts him is whether to admit to his sin of adultery, or to continue to conceal it from the public eye in order to preserve his reputation. Hawthorne’s portrayal of Dimmesdale shows that when faced with difficult situations, people tend to choose to bury the truth as it seems like the easier thing to do. However, as we learn from Dimmesdale’s experience, failing to admit to our misdeeds eventually causes even more distress than the transgression itself.
Even though I did not choose the same concept as you I do agree Suggestibility plays a role in eyewitness testimoney because an investigator could tell the eyewitness false statements to try to trick the eyewitness into an wrong answer. Also I believe eyewitness testimonials are not the most precise way of convicting criminals because Distinguishing proof mistakes happen,and these blunders can prompt people being dishonestly blamed and even
There is a very fine line between a lie being hurtful and a lie being beneficial. In the case of the father and the son, I believe the son lying to his father was more beneficial than the negative effects of the father becoming agitated. Therapeutic lying can beneficial in controlled settings. The emotions exhibited when the father is upset can be brutal and dangerous to himself and to the people around him. Although I think that lying was justified in this scenario, I think lying to dementia victims should be taken seriously and extreme selectivity should be used in order to not further upset the sufferer with conflicting