On Tuesday 29 Apr 2008 3:55:19 pm Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote:

> court or other "authority" _mediates_ this vengeance, it does not
> continue forever. it is one eye for one eye; not, as in the example

The author accepts that this is correct but seems to lament that 
the "satisfaction" of vengeance is removed as in the passage quoted below

>Jozef would still have been deprived of the personal satisfaction that Daniel
>enjoyed. 

>My conversations with Daniel made me understand what we have given up by
>leaving justice to the state. In order to induce us to do so, state
>societies and their associated religions and moral codes teach us that
>seeking revenge is bad. But, while acting on vengeful feelings clearly
>needs to be discouraged, acknowledging them should be not merely
>permitted but encouraged. To a close relative or friend of someone who
>has been killed or seriously wronged, and to the victims of harm
>themselves, those feelings are natural and powerful. Many state
>governments do attempt to grant the relatives of crime victims some
>personal satisfaction, by allowing them to be present at the trial of
>the accused, and, in some cases, to address the judge or jury, or even
>to watch the execution of their loved one’s murderer."

I am uncomfortable with this. Not everyone is likely to look forward to taking 
revenge and learning that satisfaction might come from this - the author may 
be setting up a strawman here. 

Time and time again one hears of relatives of dead people who do not seek 
revenge, knowing that it will not bring the dead person back, but only 
seek "justice" in terms of nabbing the guilty party and keeping others from 
being harmed - i.e preventing or cutting short any satisfaction the killer 
may have got from murder.

There is evidence about to show that killing does not come easy to humans and 
people need to be conditioned to kill.  I believe that killing deliberately 
once makes it easier to do it again, especially if a person 
gains "satisfaction" from it. That might only mean that there may be a 
pathological streak in a person who gains satisfaction from killing - so I 
believe it is incumbent upon any law enforcing agent (religion/police/ 
whoever) to do everything to prevent anyone from getting "personal 
satisfaction" by killing or vengeance.

In short what the author laments as being "missed out by state punishment" is 
being missed out justifiably. 

shiv




Reply via email to