Gregory Webb

This paper examines investigative interviewing and the application of deontological ethics, arguing that the methods used to obtain information are as morally significant as the outcomes they produce. True, persuasion is often necessary in investigative settings, but ethical concerns arise when influence shifts into manipulation, deception, or coercion. Drawing on deontological principles of duty, honesty, and respect for individual autonomy, the paper evaluates most up-to-date interviewing practices, including the Wicklander-Zulawski method and the PEACE model. Too, it contrasts deontological reasoning with utilitarian and virtue ethics perspectives, highlighting the strengths and limitations of each framework in investigative settings. Supported by research on false confessions and ethical interviewing, the analysis argues that truth-seeking must be steadfast in every attempt to maintain transparency, integrity, and respect for human dignity. Finally, the paper argues that ethical investigative interviewing requires adherence to professional duties alongside of the cultivation of moral character and organizational cultures that prioritize accountability over expediency.

Drawing from Ernest Becker's "The Denial of Death", this chapter explores the idea that a great deal of human behavior is motivated by the need to overcome our awareness of mortality. Becker argued that people pursue 'immortality projects' -- or sources of meaning, identity, or forms of recognition that allow them to feel connected to something larger than themselves. These projects typically manifest into constructive and socially admired forms: starting a family, pursuing a career, writing a book, painting your masterpiece, etc. However, what's less discussed, is how they also have the capacity to emerge in destructive forms when a person lacks the ability, resources, or support to pursue legitimate avenues but still has the same desire to feel significant as everyone else. By connecting Becker's insights to questions of identity, alienation, and criminality, this chapter argues that the search for meaning is not just a philosophical concern but an intensely powerful force which shapes both social order and social deviance. Chapter 3, The Things We Leave Behind - The Fractured Self

In 'Reasons and Persons,' Derek Parfit takes a reductionist approach towards personal identity and challenges the common belief that people inherently possess a deep, metaphysically powerful, self-persisting identity. Parfit makes the argument that once personal identity is understood in terms of psychological continuity instead of a strict chronological identity, many ordinary moral instincts, more specifically, those that resist any kind of aggregation, then lose their apparent force (Parfit, 1984). This argument is typically perceived as pressure being placed on deontological moral constraints and as supporting outcome-oriented moral reasoning. In response, via his PhD Dissertation, Dr. Adam Potthast counters by arguing that those sort of conclusions do not follow from reductionism. Potthast maintains that while personal identity can be metaphysically thin, common-sense moral constraints stay normatively justified, and that attempts to arrive at utilitarian prescriptions straight from metaphysical claims involve an illicit move from descriptive facts to moral authority (Potthast, 2005). In other words, Dr. Potthast is claiming that Parfit is attempting to achieve an ought from an is. I do agree that this was precisely what Parfit was attempting to achieve and I applaud Dr. Potthast for intervening. Normatively, I believe Dr. Potthast built a roadblock that will stop modern philosophers from reaching extreme conclusions without first putting in any real work. With that said, I will build on this insight (and interaction) and design a prescription by reviewing reductionist common-sense morality within the institutional context of the criminal justice system. In the following paper, I will argue that because criminal justice involves authorized coercive power, moral constraints necessarily precede optimization. And the law, if properly understood, will operate as a shield that limits the exercise of power instead of a sword designed to maximize aggregate social outcomes.