Discussion Topic:
You
and your group have been working on your panel presentation about the
death penalty for several weeks, with one week to go before you are
responsible for conducting the panel discussion in your class. This
project represents a major portion of your grade in the small group
class, and you are required to conclude your presentation by taking a
position—your group must come out either in favor of or against the
death penalty. After hashing this out for weeks, you have sorted through
all your evidence and have almost reached consensus that you will come
out in favor of the death penalty. This week, while doing library
research for another class, you happen upon a new study, based on
systematic examination of states with the death penalty, that strongly
suggests the death penalty does not deter crime. The study seems well
done; you don’t think you can dismiss it as a piece of biased or poorly
done research. But you know if you present it to your group, you’ll push
your emerging consensus further away, and you hate to do that! You are
so close now to agreement, and you know this study will set you back.
What do you do?
1. For what reasons would you present the article to your group?
2. For what reasons would you withhold the article?
3. What would you actually do?
Just do response each posted # 1 to 3 down below only.
Posted 1
Hello Class and Professor,
Capital punishment is and has always been a very controversial topic
amongst individuals. After review of the article and review of how this
article should be presented I came to the conclusion that it was very
important to review the elements of argument in terms of the article and
to identify if this article is a reliable source of information before
presenting it to my team for debate. After ensuring that the article is
from a credible source, I think that the ethical decision that must be
made is to present the article to the team for an open discussion on it.
This will not only allow the team to review and discuss the topic, but
the team may think of things in brainstorming that opens other doors and
thoughts that could have easily been missed by one individual making a
sole decision. If the article was not from a reliable source, it would
be important to withhold the article from the team as it could sway the
team in a direction that was not appropriate because of false
information.
Posted 2
To be in favor of or against the death penalty has been an ongoing
debate for years. While there are many reasons why the death penalty
should be abolished, there are also many reasons why it should still
stand in some circumstances.
In this scenario, there are a few reasons why the article should be
presented to the group. This piece of information is important. The fact
that the death penalty doesn’t deter crime, forces individuals to
question it’s purpose. This information can make other members of the
group want to change their stance as well.
There are also reason why the article should be withheld as well. One
reason would be the time constraints. There is only one week remaining
before the panel begins. By using this article the group will have to
start from the beginning. Another reason to withhold the article is the
question of whether the article will even have the same affect on
everyone. While some may be moved, others may care less and decide to
stick with the current decision.
Based on the reasons above I would just withhold the article. As
previously stated, time is almost up and it would require the group to
work extra hard in order to change it’s stance. It is also not 100% sure
what everyone’s reaction to this article will be. It would only waste
time if no one else agreed.
Posted 3
The
capital punishment or also known as death penalty, presents many
studies in the favor of and against and has done so since the birth of
the concept. Whenever looking at an article or a study I think there are
three major things that need to be analyzed and those are Aristotle’s
three elements of a persuasive argument. Ethos (personal credibility),
logos (logical organization and reasoning), and pathos (emotional
appeal) should all be considered when examining studies and articles
(Diestler, 2013). If the study was from a creditable and reputable
source and the material was logical and presented relevant examples,
controlled studies and expert testimony to support their ideas then I
would present the study to the group. Reasons I would withhold the
article would be because I would not want to set the group back after
all the hard work we have put into the assignment. I would also withhold
the article if I found that the article had very weak ethos and logos
aspect to the writing. What I would actually do is present the article
to the group. Weather is good, bad or indifferent to me, someone else in
the group may be able to pull something from it or read it and catch
something that I didn’t that may help our position on the death penalty.
If it does show to provide evidence that may swing our position to the
other side, then that is a decision we as a group should make and not
just myself by withholding or presenting this article. I personally am
in favor of the death penalty and while it may not deter crime,
sometimes the punishment has to fit the crime.
