Compare And Contrast Arthur O Grady And Selma

597 Words3 Pages

Arthur O'Grady and Selma In Dogless County a man named Arthur O'Grady is the assistant deputy attorney for the county. The most recent case on his list was that of a local woman named Selma. She is charged with lewd conduct for her solicitation of prostitution. O'Grady has known Selma for a long time and is fully aware of her behavior. She is not a well educated person, has a drug habit and three young children to support. On previous home inspections O'Grady saw that her home was in good condition and the children were well taken care of. When it came time for Selma's case, O'Grady allowed a filing deadline to expire and the case was dismissed. Virtue Ethics In Plato's Republic he had the idea of a society where people did not need laws to govern them because they would just do the right thing on their own. Selma likely knows that her crimes are against the laws of her state but commits them anyway. Arthur O'Grady knows that solicitation is against the law is well but is allowing Selma to get away with it by not meeting his deadline to file her case. This does not fit in with Plato's idea that people will do what is right all on their own. Both people in question know the right they should be choosing to follow but instead go in a different direction.
Formalism …show more content…

Selma is fulfilling her duties as a mom but, this isn't about her. O'Grady has a duty as the deputy attorney to prosecute people who break the law. In this case, he has knowingly allowed a case to get thrown out by his inaction and therefore not fulfilled his duty. Another piece of formalism is that if a rule exists, it exists all the time. To that point, solicitation is always illegal and prosecuting the commission is always necessary. Under formalism, Arthur O'Grady's actions are not ethically acceptable. Arthur should either always charge people for their crimes or not at all. There should be no in

Open Document