Shame Is Worth a Try' and 'Condemn the Crime Not the Person' Summary
Suppose a person is driving under the influence of alcohol, what do you suppose the punishment should be? Should we shame them? Or make them feel guilty? According to the essay, 'Shame Is Worth a Try,' putting a 'DUI' sticker on the car is a perfect example of shame. However, in the essay 'Condemn the Crime, Not the Person,' the offender should do community service for vehicle situations. So, which punishment is more efficient based on both essay's interpretations? Even though both essays reasonably proved their point, June Tangney's essay 'Condemn the Crime, Not the Person,' provided a valid argument applying more credible research. When further understanding the arguments about the types of punishments, many can identify the reason why one is more beneficial than the other. This is ‘Shame Is Worth a Try’ and 'Condemn the Crime Not the Person' summary paper in which we will have an attempt to analyse this issue.
In his argumentative essay 'Shame Is Worth a Try,' Dan M. Kahan argues that shame is a more appropriate and affordable punishment than incarceration for nonviolent crimes offenders committed. To prove his point, Kahan explained the variety of punishments that can be used, and the efficacy it has on society. Aside from other punishments, shaming someone publicly like wearing a sandwich board for stealing results in criminals not doing the crime again because 'people value their reputation emotionally and financially'. Kahan deemed that shame punishment would be an effective impediment, unlike imprisonment that Kahan concluded to be inhumane and community service to be useless.
In contrast, June Tangney's argumentative essay 'Condemn the Crime, Not the Person,' argues that shaming the criminal is not the answer, however focusing on the crime is. To prove her point, not only did June Tangney use research and examples to define the difference and morality between guilt and shame, but explained how shame does not 'motivate constructive change in behavior'. She concluded that the criminals feel guilty once they are adjusted to the nature of their crime in doing community service with the thought that ''I did a bad thing' rather than 'I am a bad person''.
Kahan has strongly used how shaming brings effect on society, but he neglected the proof and logic in his essay. His assertion had no support. He utilized weak examples for his cases, suggesting that shameful punishments are efficient. Only focusing on his view, he failed to discuss his confrontation, when mostly pointing out the considerable side of shameful punishment and not morality. However, whenever June Tangney's contentious essay had a prove to point, she had research to support her claim. Unlike Kahan, Tangney mentioned the good and the bad of both punishments, making her essay stronger. When she used examples, she somehow made it relate to the research making it easier to understand. For example, she ensured the readers understood the difference between guilt and shame, by applying this research, she concluded that there would be a change in bad behavior in criminals.
In either case, both punishments can be efficient in a way, but based on the research given in “Condemn the Crime, Not the Person” by Tangney and “Shame is Worth a Try” by Kahan, June Tangney's essay, 'Condemn the Crime, Not the Person,' provided a valid argument applying more credible research. Some people like to believe based on personal opinion and not facts, but based on this research, should we shame them or make them feel guilty?
