Ancient Era: Key Points
Three C’s:
Cops (Does college education make cops less likely to use force?)
Courts (Does expert witness testimony influence juror decision making?)
Corrections (Prisoners and Re-Entry) (What interventions prevent recently released prisoners from recidivating? (re-offending)
The Code of Hammurabi:
Context and Structure: Best-preserved ancient code, though not the oldest (Ur-Nammu code is older but only fragments survive). Named for King Hammurabi, who had divine authority to enact laws. Structure includes a prologue, an epilogue, and roughly 200 short, repetitive rules.
covering areas such as trade, family, labor, and property rights
written in cuneiform
Epilogue:
Hammurabi’s claim to legitimacy
The king restates that he rules by divine favor (the gods granted him authority) and presents himself as the bringer of justice and order.
This mirrors the prologue’s emphasis on divine backing (frequently the god Shamash, god of justice, is invoked).
Summary of achievements and duties
He lists or reminds readers of his public works and beneficent acts: building or repairing canals, temples, and cities; protecting the weak; punishing the wicked; and generally ensuring prosperity and order.
The epilogue frames these acts as evidence that the laws serve the common good.
Instructions for preservation and dissemination
Hammurabi directs that copies or inscriptions of the laws be placed in public and sacred places (temples, city centers) so judges and citizens can consult them.
This is a deliberate step to guarantee that law is known and enforceable across his realm.
Curses and penalties for tampering
The epilogue contains strong warnings: anyone who erases, alters, conceals, or defaces the stele (or otherwise tampers with the text) will suffer divine punishment or misfortune. These curses are intended to deter interference and protect the law’s integrity.
Blessings for upholding the laws (implicit or explicit)
By contrast, those who preserve and enforce the law are implicitly promised stability and the favor of the gods—another means of encouraging compliance.
Key Themes:
Divine authority: Laws derive legitimacy from divine sanction.
Retribution (lex talionis): Embodies the "eye-for-an-eye" principle.
Social hierarchy and gender: Punishments vary significantly based on social status (slaves vs. nobles) and gender. Women's status tied to husbands and property.
Criminal intent (mens rea): Provisions sometimes account for reasons behind a crime, hinting at early concepts of mental state.
Early Modern Connections to Hammurabi's Code:
Presumption of innocence: Hammurabi's code addresses harm from wrongful accusations; modern CCJ emphasizes burden of proof on the accuser.
Mens rea: Early concepts of criminal intent anticipate later English common law.
The Ancient Egyptian Perspective:
Goddess Maat: Symbolizes cosmic balance and order. Crime disrupts this balance, and punishment aims to restore it, rather than solely retribute (as in Hammurabi).
Ancient Greece and Plato's Apology:
Plato's Apology details Socrates' defense before a jury, illustrating a shift from monarchic/divine authority towards jury-based, participatory justice in Greek city-states.
The Fall of the Western Roman Empire:
A gradual process with political fragmentation and unrest, rather than a single event. It set the stage for medieval legal developments.
Definitions and Core Principles:
Crime: Breaking rules that harm society (Western view) or disrupt balance/harm individuals (Eastern view).
Justice: Fairness, equality, retribution, restitution, rehabilitation, deterrence, and safety.
Lex talionis: "Eye for an eye"; foundational for retribution.
Mens rea: Mental state or criminal intent.
Presumption of innocence: Modern constitutional safeguard; contrast with Hammurabi's focus on false accusation harm.
Natural law: Moral principles existing independently of human law.
Maat: Egyptian goddess of truth and balance.
Philosophical Implications and Flaws:
Divine authority can lead to rigid obedience and limited accountability.
Social hierarchy and gender bias in punishments raise concerns about fairness and equality.
Laws reflecting specific cultural contexts may clash with modern aspirations for universal human rights.
Punishment may have unintended consequences (e.g., learned helplessness); restorative approaches offer an alternative to pure punitive methods.
The Apology Of Socrates
THE DEFENSE:
I AM NOT ELOQUENT:
He takes the claim of eloquence as a charge against him: if being eloquent means speaking truth, then he would be eloquent, but not in the accusers’ sense (they use polished but false arguments).
He asks the judges to disregard his habitual speech style and to judge only whether what he says is just, since he is old (over seventy) and new to this kind of court.
He notes that the court is a different language environment from the forum, and pleads for justice over stylish orators.
MY FIRST ACCUSERS
Socrates says his accusers are twofold: recent accusers and long-time accusers; he fears some accusers more than Anytus and his party because they have swayed many from childhood and act in his absence.
He cites the report that there exists a belief Socrates searches into things under the earth and in the heavens and makes worse appear better
He asks Athenians to test the credibility of the accusers by asking whether they have heard him discuss these topics; if they have not, that strengthens the claim that many things about him are false.
WHY I AM CALLED WISE
He recalls Chaerephon’s question to the oracle at Delphi: is anyone wiser than Socrates? The oracle answered there was none wiser
Socrates explains his method of inquiry: he sought to understand what the oracle meant by “wise,” and visited those reputed to be wise (politicians, poets, artisans) to test whether they truly understood what they professed.
The process revealed that those with reputations for wisdom often believed themselves wise in philosophy or politics, yet in truth did not possess real knowledge. Socrates thus concluded that he is wiser only in recognizing his own ignorance, whereas others mistake their own knowledge for wisdom.
THE ORIGIN OF MY METHOD
He narrates his systematic cross-examination: first politicians, then poets, then artisans.
Politicians appeared to know much but often lacked real understanding; poets were inspired and eloquent yet ignorant of the meanings of their craft; artisans possessed practical skill but overestimated their general wisdom.
Socrates shows that their supposed wisdom is superficial, leading him to conclude that human wisdom is limited; the god intends this to humble the pretensions of those who think they know more than they do.
This ongoing process has produced many enemies and the label that Socrates is wise, which he challenges as a misinterpretation of the oracle.
He adds that his poverty and his dedication to the god’s command constrain his public life, leaving little time for state matters.
TELL ME MELETUS…
Meletus is the chief accuser; the deposition claims Socrates acts unjustly by corrupting the youth and not believing in the city’s gods, while introducing new spiritual beings.
Socrates interrogates Meletus about what makes the youth better: if the youth are improved by the laws, by the judges, by the senators, etc., who then corrupt them? His goal is to show that Meletus has not given a coherent account of how youth are made better.
He presses Meletus to identify who makes the youth better; Meletus remains silent, exposing the inconsistency of the charge.
He argues that even if he corrupts the youth, it would be involuntary or unintended; if involuntary, it should be corrected rather than punished as a crime.
I CANNOT ABANDON MY POST
Socrates asserts his duty to the god and to philosophy, even if it leads to death, and refuses to abandon his mission.
He describes his divine sign or daemon (daimon) that accompanies him and guides his actions; he frames his public instruction as obedience to the god rather than to the city’s political expectations.
He compares his stance to a soldier posted at a post; to abandon it would be to betray a higher legal and moral duty.
He argues that fear of death should not justify abandoning truth or philosophy, and that death may not be the worst evil; the greatest evil would be to fear it and deny truth.
I AM GOD’S GIFT TO ATHENS
Socrates presents himself as a divine gift to Athens, a gadfly to rouse the city from lethargy and complacency.
He warns that if he is put to death, Athens will not easily find another man like him; he believes his mission is to awaken philosophical inquiry and virtue.
WHY I TEACH BUT DO NOT ENGAGE IN POLITICAL LIFE
He recounts his rare public service: he never held magisterial offices except as a private citizen; he acted as a critic of political practices, often opposing injustices even when that brought him danger.
He explains that his philosophical vocation has kept him from public political life because involvement would risk his own safety and undermine his mission to improve souls rather than manage the city’s affairs.
He claims his poverty is proof that he did not seek pay for teaching; he did not take money from students or rulers, which Meletus could not prove.
WHY I WILL NOT BEG FOR MERCY
Socrates anticipates that someone might reproach him for not entreating the judges with tears, children, or relatives to secure mercy.
He argues that he has three sons and a family, yet he would not exploit them to gain mercy from the court; such entreaties would be undignified and unjust.
He asserts that it would be dishonorable to beg; a good man should not seek life by appealing to others’ compassion, and it would be contrary to the soul’s cultivation and virtue.
He asserts that if death is the will of the gods, he should accept it; he would rather die than surrender his principles or cease his pursuit of virtue.
THE PENALTY PHASE: A CLOSE VOTE
Socrates acknowledges the verdict of death and reflects on the vote: he did not expect the sentence to be carried by such a narrow margin; if only thirty votes had shifted sides, he might have been acquitted.
WHAT DO I DESERVE?
Socrates asks what penalty he deserves; he argues that he has not pursued wealth or public power and has spent his life exhorting others to take care of their souls rather than bodies or riches.
He rejects the notion of paying a fine or exile; if he must choose between death and other penalties, he would accept death rather than imprisonment or disreputable life.
FAREWELL TO ATHENS: YOU HAVE CONDEMNED YOURSELVES
He prophesies that those who condemned him will face future consequences and that their actions reveal a departure from true wisdom.
He dismisses the idea that his defeat is a result of lack of argument; rather, it is due to audacity and impudence, and a refusal to fake concord with injustice.
DEATH IS A BLESSING
Socrates argues that death should not be feared; it could be a blessing either as a dreamless sleep or as a journey to the realm of the dead where he could meet heroes and philosophers.
He envisions conversing with those in the afterlife, learning who among them is wise and who merely believes themselves wise.
He concludes that to a good man, nothing is evil, neither life nor death; death is a transition or a release from cares, and nothing should induce fear of death.
GOODBYE
He ends with a farewell to Athens, urging his sons to cultivate virtue over wealth; to model themselves after the virtue he sought to embody.
He acknowledges the uncertainty of which state is better for him or for Athens, but asserts that he goes to die with courage, and that the city must live on without him, while he remains committed to his soul and philosophy.
PRACTICAL TAKEAWAYS FOR EXAM PREP
Key charges against Socrates: corrupting the youth, not believing in the city’s gods, introducing new daimonia/spirits.
The structure of the defense: (1) I am not eloquent; (2) My accusers; (3) Why I am not wise; (4) My method’s origin; (5) The Meletus cross-examination; (6) I cannot abandon my post; (7) I am God’s gift to Athens; (8) Why I teach but do not engage in politics; (9) Why I will not beg for mercy.
Verdict and sentence: end-of-argument dynamics, considerations about the number of votes needed for acquittal, and the final death sentence with a numerical record: 360-140{ (dikasts’ verdict)}
Death as a philosophical and ethical concept: death could be a blessing or a new opportunity for inquiry; the dialogue argues that a good man should fear neither life nor death when aligned with virtue.
Aquinas' Treatise on Law: Summa Theologiae (QQ 90-108)
These notes cover Aquinas's detailed exploration of law, focusing on its essence, various types, and specific applications, particularly distinguishing between the Old and New Laws.
I. Major Topics and Core Principles
Essence of Law (QQ 90-92):
Four Articles on Law's Essence: Aquinas investigates what law is, its relation to reason, the common good, its authority, and its promulgation.
Definition of Law: "Law is nothing else than an ordinance of reason for the common good, promulgated by him who has the care of the community."
Four Extrinsic Principles of Law: These principles guide the understanding and application of law.
Objections and Replies: Key to Aquinas's method, where potential counterarguments are presented and then systematically refuted or clarified.
II. Kinds of Law
Eternal Law:
God's providential governance of the entire universe, the ultimate source of all other laws.
Natural Law:
Rational creatures' participation in the Eternal Law.
Discernible through human reason, directing us towards our natural ends (e.g., preserving life, procreating, seeking truth).
Human Law (Positive Law):
Particular determinations devised by human reason from the precepts of natural law for the common good.
Must be just and directed towards the common good to be true law.
Divine Law:
Old Law (Lex Vetus): Revealed through Moses, found in the Old Testament.
Precepts:
Moral Precepts: Commands directly derived from natural law (e.g., Ten Commandments).
Ceremonial Precepts: Pertaining to the worship of God, foreshadowing Christ.
Judicial Precepts: Governed social and civil life for the Israelites, applying principles of justice.
New Law (Lex Nova): Revealed through Christ, found in the New Testament.
Primarily the law of grace and love, instilled in the heart by the Holy Spirit.
Fulfills and perfects the Old Law.
Focuses on interior disposition and charity.
Fomes (Incitement to Sin):
While not a type of law in the strict sense, it is discussed in relation to the inclination of human nature towards sin after the Fall.
III. Relations and Distinctions
Old Law, New Law, and their Relations: Extensive treatment on how the New Law transcends and perfects the Old Law, particularly concerning its precepts and spiritual efficacy.
The New Law's grace empowers adherence to moral precepts.
Key Distinctions: Careful differentiation between moral, ceremonial, and judicial precepts is crucial for understanding the Old Law's continued relevance and abrogation.
IV. Argumentative Logic
The notes distil the logical progression of Aquinas's arguments, including his presentation of objections and lucid replies, crucial for understanding his philosophical and theological reasoning.
Exam Study Guide: Ask questions about these Kai
Exam Overview
The first exam is worth 100 points (22% of final grade).
Types of questions: Multiple choice, true/false, matching.
Exam date: Class on Friday, 10/3.
The Ages of Criminology
Difference Between Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminology: Study of crime, its causes, and consequences.
Criminal Justice: System and procedures for dealing with crime (law enforcement, courts, corrections).
Discussion on whether one discipline is more important than the other.
The Three Cs of Criminal Justice
Crime
Causation
Control
Six Major Eras of Criminal Justice
Identification of and understanding the six major eras relevant to Criminal Justice (CCJ).
The Ancient Era
Definition of Crime in the Code of Hammurabi
Ancient definition based on strict laws; known for 'an eye for an eye' approach.
Major Themes in Ancient CCJ
Retribution and punishment
Social order and stability
Moral codes
Principle of Lex Talionis
Lex Talionis: Law of retribution, emphasizing equivalent punishment for wrongdoings (e.g., ).
Natural Law According to the Ancient Greeks
Concept of universal moral principles.
The Good: Ideal state of human existence; morality aligned with intrinsic laws of nature.
Reading Assignments - Key Details
Code of Hammurabi:
Not the only legal code from that era.
Identify specific punishments defined in the Code.
Plato’s Apology:
Socrates executed for allegedly corrupting youth and impiety.
Socrates recommended self-imposed exile as the penalty for his perceived crimes.
The Pre-Classical Era
Political Independence
Ancient Greeks lost political independence to various invading powers, notably the Romans.
Influence of Ancient Romans on Modern CJ System
Similarities and Differences
Legal Precedent: Established practices and precedents in law-making.
Trial Lawyers: Role of figures like Cicero, who shaped legal arguments and representation.
Legal Standing: The concept of who has the right to bring a case.
Equality in Punishments
Investigation into whether punishments were consistent across different social classes.
Function of Police in Ancient Rome
Investigative and enforcement roles tasked with maintaining order and dealing with crimes.
Factors Contributing to the Fall of Ancient Rome
Economic troubles
Military overspending
Political corruption
Invasions by tribes
Late Pre-Classical Era: "Demonological" Era
Characterized by beliefs in supernatural causes of crime.
Common punishments included torture and executions based on alleged witchcraft.
Natural Law According to Thomas Aquinas
Natural Law posits that moral principles are universally understood.
Queries whether justice is inherent or must be actively pursued through human actions.