Critical Analysis: Death and Justice by Edward Kotch Essay

In his essay with pretend to keen penalisation entitled end and Justice, which first appeared in The New country on April 15, 1985, Edward I. Koch aggressively refutes the claims of individuals who are opposed to the subject matter with seven-spot firm and satisfying points. A native of New York, born 1924, Koch was an Ameri disregard lawyer, politician, political commentator and a reality television arbitrator. He gain his law degree in 1948 from New York University and practiced law in New York City for almost two decades thereafter. He was a component of the U.S House of Representatives, serving from 1969 to 1977 and in the later year, he was so elected as New York mayor, holding the post until 1990. With such a strong and wide variety in terms of line of work, it is my whim that his ingests communicated in this essay by focus of his, logical, ethical and rational petition are sanitary-thought out and unbiased. Unbiased or impartial, if you will, due to the detail that with the confuter style in which the argument was written, the opposing claims would first remove to be identified and evaluated before generating an objecting response.The piece of work in my opinion achieves its refrain and is well organized by use of password, pathos and ethos, thus influencing a successful but indeed controversial essay. As mentioned in my preliminary split, the essay is carefully structured into seven sturdy points in which each, Koch identifies the claims of his opponents followed by his rebuttal arguments. This gets the piece much easier to follow and interpret, hence making his arguments exceedingly clear and concise. This also influences the readers to grasp a better knowledge of his lay out hence increasing the probability of reader agreement.In this logical schema of ideas, each argument is but justified by the use of analogies, if, and accordingly instructions, statistics, stories and the use of liable sources (experts, scholars). S ome end-to-end the text take prepare as follows in his first refutation in which he rejects the statement that the death penalty is barbaric and draws and analogy between cancer and murder. It is my legal opinion that this was an extremely effectual strategy used by Koch as analogies bring forward participation and increases understanding of anunfamiliar topic by comparing it to something that is sooner familiar in his third refutation where Koch refutes the opinion of the opponent that an guileless person might be executed by mistake. By way of statistics he proved that this was never the case. He cited a study of 7,000 executions in the USA from 1893 to 1971, and concludes that the records fail to show that such cases occur. Statistics ultimately speak for themselves, needing no further clarification hence why their use is extremely important and in this case, utterly persuasive.This was a great execution in the discipline of logos which totally disregarded the opposing cl aim without a doubt. unco Koch does not end that particular argument there but quite an continues by exhibiting truth and developing such truth by examples. He says Human life deserves special protection and one of the best shipway to guarantee that protection is to assure that convicted manslayers do not kill once again. He thusly proceeds by providing an example, and in this case, of an unexecuted recidivist murderer named Lemuel Smith who was sentenced to about six years life sentence.This was immaculate why you may ask? This same murderer then killed a muliebrity corrections officer. Additional life sentences for Smith, according to Koch are meaningless. It is my view that examples reiterate and re-enforce a concept or thought, in this case the to begin with provided statistic. This example provided also provoked ones rational cerebration and circumstantial reasoning hence increasing the probability that readers are prepared to agree with Koch and his position in his fourth refutation where he refuted that detonating device penalization cheapens the value of human life.In his immaculate use of if, then statements, Koch says if we lower the penalty for rape, we lower our view or regard for the victims suffering, discomposure and personal integrity. In the same instance, by exacting the highest penalty for murder, we then affirm the highest value of human life, which influences logical reasoning and critical thinking, both forms and arts of rhetoric used to persuade intellectually (logos). To conclude my first point, it is my view that the essay did in position follow a logical system of ideas by way of seven clear points.each point was further justified by use of rhetorical strategies to make the argument much more understandable as well as believable. It is safe to say that Kochs essay was particularly powerful where logos is concerned. Throughout the text, despite not in abundance, there is in point some sense of stirred up appeal (patho s). Although Kochs primary notion throughout the piece is aggressive, he distinctively manages to appeal to our emotions in some contexts. For example, once more, take his fourth refutation where he refuted that capital punishment cheapens the value of human life.He uses rape, a very emotional and spunky topic for any individual within our society, and basically goes on further to state that if we lower the penalty for rape, we lower our view or regard for the victims suffering, humiliation and personal integrity. His use of connotation with words such as victims suffering, horrible experience, humiliation and increased danger invoked a feeling kind-heartedness for the victim and the situation by the way it appealed to the heart and to ones emotion. Rape is in fact a terrible occurrence for which good-will is usually given to the victim.It is my belief that Koch deliberately seized the opportunity to demand the readers emotional attention by evoking a sense of pity or understan ding in his efforts for us to conceptualize and agree with his point. Very good crusade Given the background information provided in my initial paragraph, it is implied that Koch is a presumable source. This was an underlying governing of ethos. Throughout the text, his tone suggests authority as well as credibility. He was a lawyer, a TV judge, a politician and a mayor. He was a well-rounded scholar with a diverse work history.It is of my opinion that he has dealt with a variety of different cases on a wide spectrum of practice. The area of ethos is therefore implied. Although for the most part, the ethos is in fact underlying by way of his background information, throughout the text you can still witness hints of his authority. Take for example, in his fourth refutation he ridicules his critics, one in particular, Jimmy Breslin by calling his statement regarding capital punishment sophistic nonsense. Not only is this satire but establishment of authority by way of discrediting anothers opinion.This in fact was effective as it shows that Koch has in fact done his research regarding what his critics have say thus establishing him as a trusted and unbiased source. other example can be found in his sixth refutation, where he makes reference to the bible, he establishes credibility by introducing us to the greatest thinkers of the nineteenth century Kant, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Montesquieu, and Mill who all agreed that natural law decently authorized the sovereign to take life in order to rationalise justice.According to philpapers. org, an online research philosophy engine it can be said they were all well-known philosophers who are considered to be central figures of modern philosophy. bring up is one of the easiest ways to persuade an audience as the majority of us human beings tend to follow the way in which famous large number ranging from celebrities to scholars, think. This then influences the way society thinks hence my belief that the use of credible sources in this instance was impeccable.Within the same argument (the sixth refutation), I also noticed that it was not biased or un somewhat as he includes that Jeremy Bentham, another great philosopher, was ambivalent to the claims of the others. He does not bring out out any information hence making the argument fair and believable, which in turn establishes his credibility and believability. He then goes on to establish additional credibility by revealing names of other scholars (Washington, Jefferson and Franklin) who endorsed the claim.This was effective in persuading us as the readers to understand and accept his point of view. Death and Justice is an effectively-written essay which judiciously rebuts the claims of individuals opposed to the capital punishment. Each paragraph within the essay is well-thought out and organized effectively. With the use of logos, pathos and subliminal forms of ethos, Koch immaculately achieves his purpose of persuading the readers to conceptualize, understand and agree with his claims and opinions regarding the death penalty.Although Koch ridicules the opponent throughout some exerts of the text, the readers are still able to grasp his aggressive and almost certainly serious tone. It is my opinion that the argument presented was unbiased and impartial, taking into the considerateness the rebuttal style in which it was written. This piece of writing has not, and will in spades not be limited to the time in which it was written as the argument presented is very controversial, and in continued debate.