Raoul's Term Paper (1 of 3) and his outline

         In order to defeat evil a society must sometimes become an even greater evil. Eventually we find that every thing comes at a price, especially justice. Ironically, becoming unjust is the price that haunts societies quest for justice. Consequently, the problem lies in society’s need for a guilty man. So, inevitably society must make a choice. Does it protect the innocent man, does it insure that the guilty man pays, or does it find a balance? In Kafka’s novel The Trial, we find that our main character is wrongly accused a crime, which he has not committed. However, the government finds him to be guilty and in the end condemns him to death. In order to insure that no guilty men go free sadly many innocent men will be condemned. On the other hand, in order to insure that no innocent men are condemned many guilty men will go free. Unlike our current American legal system’s principle “innocent until proven guilty”, the justice system in The Trial works on a principle of “guilty until proven innocent”. Kafka put this type of legal system in The Trial in order to show how it fails the individual (Joseph K.).  However, the other type of system often fails to insure justice, and in an extreme scenario creates chaos.

         In The Trial we have a legal system that insures that the guilty man pays. If look at this type of system, we see that it deters criminals from committing crimes. In fact, if we look into the statistics, we find that countries with a legal system that insures that the guilty man pays have a significantly lower crime rate. So must inevitably accept that this system helps keep order in society. In the end, this system is better for the masses. However, in The Trial this system failed the individual. And in the real world this is also true. In fact, if we look into the statistics, we find that on top of having significantly lower crime rates, these countries also have more innocent men (proven innocent after put to death) wrongly put to death. So Kafka was right, a system like this would inevitably fail the individual, but it would also protect the masses. Some people (like myself) believe that an innocent man that pays the price, is just collateral damage, which is necessary in order to sustain a better society for the masses.


My outline:
Thesis: Inevitably society must make a choice. Does it protect the innocent man, does it insure that the guilty man pays, or does it find a balance?

Body 1: In The Trial we have a legal system that insures that the guilty man pays.

Body 2: But what if we had a legal system that completely protects the innocent man.

Body 3: Since both systems fail society must quest to find a balance.

Conclusion: In the end, our society is a horrible system; however, it is the best system that we can have.