Ethics in Criminal Justice and Criminal Procedure Assignment

Ethics in Criminal Justice and Criminal Procedure - Assignment Example As the report declares implementation of the ethical criminal procedures helps in identifying the degree of punishment for different criminal acts. Moreover, it distinguishes formerly legal acts as immoral and unethical, for instance, historically minorities and women were not allowed to vote or to help slaves as per the law. However, in the last few decades it was recognized as a highly immoral act therefore women and minorities are now given equal rights when it comes to vote or protest against oppressive governments. On the other hand torturing prisoners so as to take personal revenge may be legal in some countries but it is an unethical act. This discussion stresses that practicing ethics in our routine life is somewhat different to the implementation of ethics in law. For instance, if in real life we see someone depriving people of their freedom or stopping them to carry out their daily activities then on general basis it would be considered as unethical. But in law police is usually ordered to treat prisoners in the same way and then it is also justified with theories of criminology. Furthermore, in real life people are called as immoral if they try to keep an eye on others’ activities while on the other side law enforcement agencies spend huge monetary resources and time in spying and undercover intelligence. This substantiates that ethical approach greatly varies when it comes to real life and criminal justice.

Descartes' Discourse on the Method (Part IV) Research Paper

Descartes' Discourse on the Method (Part IV) - Research Paper Example Descartes’ Discourse on the Method (Part 4) In part four of his Discourse method, Rene Descartes delves into finding out the metaphysical basis of knowledge or truth. Having resolved to doubt any belief that he had earlier on held, and to subject all his earlier beliefs into critical evaluation through his discourse method, Descartes had to find a rational basis of knowledge that would serve as the foundation for his system of Philosophy. Descartes sought to break from the past after realising that he could doubt everything that he had earlier on held as the truth, he therefore, realised that all the theories of truth or of knowledge that his predecessors had given were insufficient and false. Descartes, therefore, started doubting everything including his own existence. But in the course of proving his own existence, Descartes ended up with a surprising argument proving God’s existence. This paper analysis and evaluates Descartes discourse method in part four and focus es on how Descartes deviated from proving his own existence as the basis of all knowledge to prove the existence of God as the source of truth. ... le he can doubt everything, he cannot, however, doubt his own existence because the doubting of his own existence requires him first to exist so as to be able to doubt. Consequently, one has to be so as to doubt, and with this realisation, Descartes found an indubitable basis of truth that would serve as the basis of his epistemology. Following this realisation he proclaimed, ‘’I think, therefore I am’’ (Descartes, Discourse on the Method, Part Four, online). This means that his very doubting self is the proof of his existence. Descartes, therefore, conceived himself as a thinking self because his thinking or doubting nature is the only thing that he could not doubt. But proving his own existence wasn’t the end of his journey in finding out the metaphysical foundation of knowledge. This is because after proving the truth of his own existence, he had now to proceed to prove the truth of other things external to him. Having proved his own existence as an indisputable truth, Descartes sought to know what makes propositions true. Since some propositions are true, like the one that he had already proved about his own existence, there must be something universal in such propositions that make them true. And reflecting on the proposition that he had already proved as indubitable truth, Descartes realised that the only assurance that he had of the truth of the proposition, I think, therefore I am, is that he could clearly and distinctly see that in order to think, he had to exist first. Descartes, therefore, took it as a general rule, that whatever is conceived clearly and distinctly must be true (Descartes, Discourse on the Method, Part four, online). But the problem in applying his general rule lay in recognizing the things that could be conceived clearly and