Drug Legalization
Since the prohibition of marijuana in 1965 there has been sparked a new heated controversy over the legalization and/or decriminalization of this and other banned substances. Many politicians and lawmakers as well as philosophers, doctors, students, etc. have weighed the facts and opinions and have come to a decision on which side of the fence to sit on. The arguments either for or against the legalization of drugs seem to stem from two main focuses of thought. These two main ideas are that of consequentialism and deontology. Consequentialism is defined as "the position that an action is right if it has good consequences and wrong if it has bad consequences" (Class Notes). On the other side, is deontology, the position that believes that "actions are right or wrong in themselves, regardless of their consequence" (Class Notes). An easy way to simplify these definitions is to think about how these two thoughts would apply to murder. A deontologist would believe that murder is wrong simply because it is the taking of another's life, that the intrinsic value of murder is bad so thus "murder is bad". A consequentialist on the other hand would lo
The two main ideas of thought held by the two divisions of these gentlemen have a great deal to do with their positions on the legalization of drugs. It is important to keep in mind that while the opinions of Friedman or Bennett, for example, are known because of their writings and expression of these opinions, we are only assuming at this point what an older philosopher, like Aristotle for example, would think about the controversy. A consequentialist, on the other hand, would not shun the drug use itself as bad, rather look past the use of the drug and place their opinion on the outcome of the usage of the drug. The consequentialist way of thought, coupled with Mill's idea of the "Harm Principle" makes for a "deeper" look into the right or wrong of drug use. Loosely paraphrased, the Harm Principle can be summarized as the rights of an individual extend as far as his neighbors' face. Meaning that personal rights are only endowed upon and justly held by the bearer of these rights so as long that they do not harm nor infringe upon others' rights (Mill). In keeping with this, a consequentialist would conclude that the use of drugs and the legalization to further the u
Some common words found in the essay are:
Class Notes, Friedman Bennett, Harm Principle, Drug Legalization, James Wilson, Ethan Nadelmann, John Milton, class notes, Norton Company, Edmund Burke, intrinsic value, Publishing Company, legalization drugs, bad consequences, aristotle example, john stuart, main ideas, mill john, harm principle, keeping idea,
Approximate Word count = 797
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
