Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues - Assignment Example

Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues Philosophy differs from reality in that it relies and focuses mostly on rational matters of argument. In other words, a person’s philosophy may refer to the several beliefs held by a person or the love for wisdom by the person. On the other hand, real situations appear more complicated than what philosophy reveals. Most of the time practical approaches issues in a rigid manner, whereas philosophy approaches issues in an open manner. This suggests that a reality or practical approaches to solving problems usually shows limitations in seeking solutions to issues by applying a provided set of rules whereas philosophical or argumentative approaches to problem solving normally shows exploration of probable options and alternatives to seeking solutions to problems. This paper will therefore discuss the philosophical and practical approach for balancing issues such as individual rights and the public protection, use of reward and punishment in criminal justice, and techniques employed for weighing the use of immoral ways to accomplish desirable ends. Moreover, recommendations to employ ethics in decision making about the mentioned issues in criminal justice will be discussed. Philosophy as well as practical approach for individual rights and public protection The most common problems arising within the community today are problems concerning individual rights as well as public protection, conduct codes for criminal justice, and morality. When solving problems regarding individual rights and public protection, the practical method would be based on set rules. For example, the rule that says, every man owns their own property and no other person has a right to his property but himself. This means that the work from his hands has lawfully gifted him with the property. A person who takes property that is not lawfully theirs is a thief and should be judged in accordance with the law. This is the case because the law guarantees security of an individual’s property protection. Irrespective of their state, a thief is defenseless to accusations from the community as per the law, and so by judgment of law, the thief is also protected from the public (Garland, 2006). A belief in fairness and justice is an important thing to present within a society. As there is no inequality of human rights on the pretext of using individual traits for example race, ethnicity, or gender. However, within a legal setting, these individual traits are considered serious issues regarding equality of human rights and have to be protected by the Government or Public. Despite the fact, that the independence declaration of 1776 underscored the conception of equality of all men regarding equality with some basic rights of life, happiness and liberty. For this purpose, the choice was made for the creation of some equal but distinct laws and rules by the Court in 1896. The reasoning behind making the laws was to protect the Equal Clauses of African Americans to grant them access to the facilities that were being enjoyed by the whites. Such kinds of rules are created within society for weakening some segregation on the grounds of gender or race in order to protect all individual human right as it is a basic public responsibility. Philosophy as well as practical approach for use of Reward and Punishment in Criminal Justice Concerning the reasons behind a thief’s actions, the philosophical viewpoint would argue that an individual does not grab or steal another person’s property unless they have a need. Philosophically, society would grant a thief a chance to return stolen property whereas practically, a thief would be judged immediately. The article written by McCloskey (1965) outlines a non‐utilitarian approach to punishment, which is ideal in the criminal justice system (p. 249-263). McCloskey argues that humanity survives with reasoning, and in order for humanity to accomplish success, they must use force to describe their capability in handling challenges. Society can opt to be grateful for the law of mutual protection or give the thief freedom to act and survive on their own genuine conditions. Either way, both thief as well as society will benefit in that, a thief will get a second chance to have a new and sincere way of life should they apply the philosophical approach (Kant, 1997). On the other hand, society has the advantage of public protection via the law should it apply the practical approach. Philosophy as well as practical approach for use of immoral means to achieve desirable ends The use of immoral means to achieve desirable ends includes lying, isolation, interrogation, sexual and physical abuse, surveillance, weapons, death threats, and denials. When it comes to issues concerning codes of conduct regarding criminal justice, the use deception and lying is not ethical. For example, a number of policemen would lie and give false confessions during interrogation in order to accomplish desired end results. According to Magid (2000), this is morally wrong both in the philosophical and practical use (p. 1168). This is wrong as false information given by a police practicing deceit while interrogation can incriminate an innocent person while the guilty one goes free. From a practical approach viewpoint, rules indicate that when somebody is guilty of a crime, they must face trial and based on the evidence provided, they will face prosecution. Practically, there is no other way of solving issues related to crime. From a philosophical approach viewpoint, investigations are required in order to have a fair and just judgment. Recommended uses of ethics in decision making concerning issues in criminal justice Ethics in criminal justice is used in decision making and may encompass moral as well as intelligent inquiry. Ethics has proven to be a central element in decision making that involves ethical dilemmas and is concerned with codes of conduct, on how to act, and the standards of conduct within different societies. Methods of setting standards range from cultural relativism to moral absolutism; a viewpoint that highlights moral diversity seems to offer the best hope for solving relativity’s issues. Investigating sources of ethical standards shows that natural law, religion, and other forms of law have an impact in shaping ethical standards. An ethical understanding is critical for capable decision making by professionals of criminal justice as well as a proper working system of the criminal justice (Hill, 1992).Moreover, ethics in criminal justice offers a way of making moral decisions especially during periods of uncertainty that concerns what is to be done in situations that require moral issues (Garland, 2006). During daily operations within the criminal justice system, ethics are highly required for the purpose of maintaining order. In summary, philosophical, as well as practical approaches are vital in solving problems in a balanced way within society. Although people may have their preferences concerning methods to solve their issues, it is important that people apply both approaches when solving issues in order to give a balanced solution to issues that come up. However, this does not suggest that philosophy is ineffective; instead it implies that moving from a philosophical viewpoint to a practical viewpoint gives a better understanding and background of problems regarding balancing issues. Therefore, this means that in order to accomplish a balanced system of solving problems, one must consider both practical and philosophical approaches. This way, criminal justice, does not only punish criminals but protects them as well in terms of them changing their lifestyles through a second chance of correcting their wrongs. References Garland, D. (2006). Concepts of culture in the sociology of punishment. Theoretical Criminology, 10(4), 419-447. Hill, T. E. (1992). Dignity and practical reason in Kant's moral theory. Kant, I. (1997). Kant: Critique of Practical Reason (Cambridge Texts In The History Of Philosophy) Author: Immanuel Kant, Mary J. Gregor, An. Magid, L. (2000). Deceptive police interrogation practices: How far is too far. Mich. L. Rev., 99, 1168. McCloskey, H. J. (1965). A non‐utilitarian approach to punishment. Inquiry, 8(1-4), 249-263. Read More