Universality In Criminal Justice

Scientific controversies involve both consensus and disagreements either over the explanation of the data obtained, accessibility of evidence to support the hypothesis or future examination. Most of the time, disagreement arises when further experimental observations and investigations are made and updated data is generated. The area of knowledge of Science works perfectly because scientists’ conclusions lead them to disagree and challenge their colleagues’ ideas and thoughts. This allows them to find more suitable approaches to interpret and analyze the researches and reach conclusions that can convey us nearer to the truth.

To what extent is universality a key factor in making ethical decisions robust?

Determining ethical decisions can

The existence of moral universalism is one of the most discussed topics, leading researchers to focus on studies, such as murder, and whether they are universally prohibited. This brings in questions of whether the substance of these prohibitions is uniform among different cultures or it differs considerably from society to society. Scientific studies of crime contain important fragments of knowledge, but do not address the presence of moral universals. What emerges from the research is that lawful framework and all the individuals around the world perceive that intended killing without justification and reason is unacceptable, and that actions of self-protection can be conceivably reasonable justifications and alibis. Murder also links to the area of euthanasia, where reason and emotion are key factors in the decision-making of this problematic. The role of ethics is highly debated because many people believe that everyone should be allowed to die in dignity and without pain, and that forcing someone to go on living, violates their personal freedom and human rights. On the other hand, many consider that live is given by God, and only God can decide when to end it. In addition, the legality of euthanasia would lead people to abuse of it. Euthanasia would certainly relieve suffering and pain, however, to many people it may be perceived as unethical and morally irresponsible to take a living life even if consented. For example, Dj Fabo was unable to die with dignity in his own country, but had to be transferred all the way up to Switzerland in order to undertaken euthanasia. His death contemplated strong emotions with reasoning and