The Logic of the Death Penalty

In Part Five (“Right of Death and Power of Life”) of Michel Foucault’s “The History of Sexuality,” he recounts the history of sexuality through its connection to politics and law. One particular section intrigues me: on page 138, Foucault describes how centuries ago the decrease in the number of hangings was associated to the increase in the number of people who died in wars. He says this resulted from humans beginning to prize life more than they had before. This phenomenon was especially evident amongst those in higher ranked positions.

Foucault states, “As soon as power gave itself the function of administering life, its reason for being and the logic of its exercise – and not the awakening of humanitarian feelings – made it more and more difficult to apply the death penalty” (138). I find it extremely significant that humans at that time understood the “logic” behind the human race. As evidenced today, it is important to treat everyone with respect because he or she is a fellow human being. Foucault continues, “One had the right to kill those who represented a kind of biological danger to others” (138). This concept also extends the idea of logic to the matter of the death penalty. In terms of how Foucault describes the situation, it is apparent that a harmful person would pay a physical penalty for his or her transgression.

However, it seems unlikely that everything was so certain. Most likely, Foucault is describing general circumstances when illustrating the old customs. He poses the question, “How could power exercise its highest prerogatives by putting people to death, when its main role was to ensure, sustain, and multiply life, to put this life in order?” (138). It is an intriguing question that most people would answer by saying that those in power need to put the civilians in the best position to coexist with each other. This theme is also a dominant one in today’s society and is a significant factor in politics.