Do We Really Get What We Deserve?
Tera Bazanka
GSI1021G
Carol Parker
May 25, 2010
We all live by a set of rules, and laws. We expect these laws to take care of us in the sense that they will bring goodness and justice. In our society, we value hard work and in return, we expect the benefits that are due. In the paper “Merit: Why do we value it?” written by Louis Pojman, he argues that we deserve what we earn. Others might argue that we should not benefit from our success because of our intelligence or social standings. However, there is a double standard, such as when people are rewarded in situations when they clearly should not be. That is not justice, and it is not bringing goodness when unfair actions, such as that are being rewarded
As Pojman argues for a world in which, “the virtuous are rewarded and the vicious punished in proportion to their relative deserts,” I agree with him. Pojman explains that desert is “typically or paradigmatically connected with action, since it rests on what we voluntarily do or produce” (Pojman, 1999).
The actions of the person are neither influenced by rules, duties, or determinations of how to act in a specific situation. A person who practices virtuous acts, those that help rather than hurt human flourishing, deserves to be rewarded for their efforts.
In Pojman’s example of Mickey Mantle and the kidney transplant, the idea of citizens who were on the donor lists long before he became a candidate being overlooked in order for him to receive a kidney first is appalling. Being the victim of any disease is awful, yet Mickey Mantle put himself in the position to develop liver problems through the actions he chose to partake in. The people ahead of him originally on the donor list, the ones who had liver problems through no fault of their own, deserved the right to be treated and given a chance to live their lives. Celebrity status should not automatically determine if one deserves a necessary procedure over a non-celebrity.
The Term Paper on Affirmative Action Should Cont
Affirmative Action Should Continue! Audiences: U.S. citizens who think that affirmative action should be suspended. Affirmative action was established to practice equal employment opportunity. Moreover, in general, it is a catchall phrase that refers to laws, customs, and social policies. It intends to ease the discrimination between majorities and minorities by giving more opportunities for ...
Living in a city where there is a constant stream of crimes being committed, the news seems to focus on the criminals more than the hard working people who get up each day to try to better the lives of others. Is it fair that the criminals get their fifteen minutes of fame so to speak, while the guy who for no other reason than to keep New Jersey clean, gets up each morning to pick up trash from the side of the road before working a full time job later receives no recognition? The criminals should instead be punished for their offenses and not given the amount of coverage as the virtuous person who only intends good deeds toward others. If more people saw the good that the man was doing and less of the violence created by the criminals, maybe more would be encouraged to join in the effort to be more virtuous. “Rewarding good works encourages further good works and punishment deters bad actions” (Pojman, 1999).
Looking at desert through Gauthier’s prison dilemma where two partners commit a crime and are caught. The police cannot prove that in addition to the crime they were caught for, they had also committed another crime for which they got away with. One of the partners is given the opportunity to cut her sentence if she testifies against the other. The question posed is does she deserve to have a reduced sentence since she was also involved in the vicious act of committing the crime at hand? The testimony she gives brings justice to a crime which otherwise might not have been served is the grounds for which her sentence is rewarded (Waller, 2008 p.75).
The Essay on Crime and Criminal Justice
Lucky Reaction Paper The book Lucky written by Alice Sebold, told the story of her rape and her life before and after it, including parts of the trial and criminal justice system. Her rape happened in 1981 in Syracuse, New York. My initial reaction to the beginning of the book was not good, but after reading the book I have changed my mind. I had a few problems with some of the issues that arose ...
Being that desert is based on the actions that we voluntarily involve ourselves in, the outcomes are what we make them. If we choose to live lives which helps others in their time of need, then when we find ourselves in a position to need help, we deserve any help that others offer. If we choose to be stingy and only think of ourselves even though we know the person next to us could really use and appreciate a helping hand, then when the time comes when we need that same help, we deserve to suffer and not receive help either. Living a virtuous life involves being true to oneself as well as others while the vicious are free to manipulate others and deceive themselves.
References
Waller, B. N. (2008).
_Consider ethics: Theory, readings, and contemporary issues (2ndedition).
New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc._
