Discussion Topic:

• Use the ethical dilemma (p. 178) “What would you do?” from the textbook. (Adams & Galanes, 2018)

Youand your group have been working on your panel presentation about thedeath penalty for several weeks, with one week to go before you areresponsible for conducting the panel discussion in your class. Thisproject represents a major portion of your grade in the small groupclass, and you are required to conclude your presentation by taking aposition—your group must come out either in favor of or against thedeath penalty. After hashing this out for weeks, you have sorted throughall your evidence and have almost reached consensus that you will comeout in favor of the death penalty. This week, while doing libraryresearch for another class, you happen upon a new study, based onsystematic examination of states with the death penalty, that stronglysuggests the death penalty does not deter crime. The study seems welldone; you don’t think you can dismiss it as a piece of biased or poorlydone research. But you know if you present it to your group, you’ll pushyour emerging consensus further away, and you hate to do that! You areso 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 topicamongst individuals. After review of the article and review of how thisarticle should be presented I came to the conclusion that it was veryimportant to review the elements of argument in terms of the article andto identify if this article is a reliable source of information beforepresenting it to my team for debate. After ensuring that the article isfrom a credible source, I think that the ethical decision that must bemade 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, butthe team may think of things in brainstorming that opens other doors andthoughts that could have easily been missed by one individual making asole decision. If the article was not from a reliable source, it wouldbe important to withhold the article from the team as it could sway theteam in a direction that was not appropriate because of falseinformation.

Posted 2

To be in favor of or against the death penalty has been an ongoingdebate for years. While there are many reasons why the death penaltyshould be abolished, there are also many reasons why it should stillstand in some circumstances.

In this scenario, there are a few reasons why the article should bepresented to the group. This piece of information is important. The factthat the death penalty doesn’t deter crime, forces individuals toquestion it’s purpose. This information can make other members of thegroup want to change their stance as well.

There are also reason why the article should be withheld as well. Onereason would be the time constraints. There is only one week remainingbefore the panel begins. By using this article the group will have tostart from the beginning. Another reason to withhold the article is thequestion of whether the article will even have the same affect oneveryone. While some may be moved, others may care less and decide tostick with the current decision.

Based on the reasons above I would just withhold the article. Aspreviously stated, time is almost up and it would require the group towork extra hard in order to change it’s stance. It is also not 100% surewhat everyone’s reaction to this article will be. It would only wastetime if no one else agreed.

Posted 3

Thecapital punishment or also known as death penalty, presents manystudies in the favor of and against and has done so since the birth ofthe concept. Whenever looking at an article or a study I think there arethree major things that need to be analyzed and those are Aristotle’sthree elements of a persuasive argument. Ethos (personal credibility),logos (logical organization and reasoning), and pathos (emotionalappeal) should all be considered when examining studies and articles(Diestler, 2013). If the study was from a creditable and reputablesource and the material was logical and presented relevant examples,controlled studies and expert testimony to support their ideas then Iwould present the study to the group. Reasons I would withhold thearticle would be because I would not want to set the group back afterall the hard work we have put into the assignment. I would also withholdthe article if I found that the article had very weak ethos and logosaspect to the writing. What I would actually do is present the articleto the group. Weather is good, bad or indifferent to me, someone else inthe group may be able to pull something from it or read it and catchsomething 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 theother side, then that is a decision we as a group should make and notjust myself by withholding or presenting this article. I personally amin favor of the death penalty and while it may not deter crime,sometimes the punishment has to fit the crime.