If U were a utilitarian ethicist, could U support the idea of collective punishment for a group in which only?

Question

a few are " bad apples?" note: the Q is phrased hypothetically to avoid the necessity of U having to defend your personal views. The empasis is on the arguments for or against the idea

Examples illustrating the idea applied in fact, R the economic, trading, & technology transfer sanctions or restrictions placed on entire nations to get the gov'ts or the leaders to change course. Nations which have been sanctioned in this way: North Korea, Iraq under Sadaam & Slovenia under Milosovic, Libya under Qadafi. A nation currently under the unilateral sanctions by the US, Cuba under Fidel.

Pls do not digress into the specific examples unless they directly relate to the ethics(the morality) of collective punishment under the ethical theory of Utilitarianism. The theory says ethical actions should always be based on maximizing "the greatest good for the greatest number of people".
Only those philosophy-based A's focused on the issue of *collective punishment will be considered for BA.

I don't think gasbags who ask only 3 Q's and game for pts are true top contributors esp not in the philosophy category.

but why is collective punishment a flawed concept. Asserting it is w/o explanation is unhelpful.

Answer 1

It depends on the punishment I suppose. I know that utilitarians are fond of the simple societal removal of a criminal, so that no further criminal behavior can be committed towards the collective. As far as economic restrictions placed on an entire collective due to certain regiment, it would depend on who the utilitarian is. If the US is claiming that it is for the benefit of the US or the benefit of the world, that no I would said imposing restrictions onto another country (you cannot impose a utilitarian philosophy ONTO another for it is not an extrinsic philosophy that can be given out as candy but must come from within..) is not a truly utilitarian action.
To determine the overarching "fair" I suggest reading Rawles.
To be a true utilitarian one must be PART of the collective that they are stating "the greatest good for the greatest mass," it cannot be exclaimed from the outside.

Answer 2

So far it seems punishment isn't working as far as eliminating bad deeds. It does get some dangerous people away from others that they would harm, but that's about it plus being a political football from time to time. Collective punishment doesn't seem too effective and hurts some who don't deserve it.

I don't know what the answer is, probably something like special ed where individual plans are carried out in small or one on one groups. That's probably not affordable.

I don't really know...we will stumble along as always.

I did hear that in Japan they were having some luck with solitary confinement for punishment. That makes some sense because in our prisons, the inmates form groups and clubs and gangs and it is a form of social living albeit not a great one. But why offer it? Why not make the choice, u can have nothing or u can get along and follow the rules....

I don't know,

Answer 3

Islam is a political association preaching hatred of all of us else. I have not any situation profiling human beings, it is no longer a bias or something different than a survival tactic. I purely ask your self how they experience understanding that the floor they geared up on is tainted with crimson meat...

Answer 4

Punishment is a flawed concept -- individually or collectively. Use it at your own risk.

Answer 5

You jerk, heeltap...what d'ya' mean---only you get to lay out stuff you call pertinent to argument and others stuff is called a personal view? who do you think you are?

Answer 6

wow, do your own homeowrk much?