Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Doomsday Machine

Lawrence Alexander

The Monist 63 (2):199-227 (1980)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Should We Aim for a Unified and Coherent Theory of Punishment?: Thom Brooks: Punishment. Routledge, New York, 2012, 282 pp., ISBN 978-0-415-43181-1, 978-0-415-43182-8.Mark Tunick - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (3):611-628.details Thom Brooks criticizes utilitarian and retributive theories of punishment but argues that utilitarian and retributive goals can be incorporated into a coherent and unified theory of punitive restoration, according to which punishment is a means of reintegrating criminals into society and restoring rights. I point to some difficulties with Brooks’ criticisms of retributive and utilitarian theories, and argue that his theory of punitive restoration is not unified or coherent. I argue further that a theory attempting to capture the complex set (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation
A Puzzle About Proportionality.David Alm - 2019 - Res Publica 25 (2):133-149.details The paper addresses a puzzle about the proportionality requirement on self-defense due to L. Alexander. Indirectly the puzzle is also relevant to the proportionality requirement on punishment, insofar as the right to punish is derived from the right to self-defense. Alexander argues that there is no proportionality requirement on either self-defense or punishment, as long as the aggressor/offender has been forewarned of the risk of a disproportional response. To support his position Alexander appeals to some puzzle cases, challenging us to (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Other People’s Errors.Larry Alexander - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):1049-1059.details The question of when other people’s bad acts belong on our moral ledger arises in a number of different scenarios. Each scenario has received some philosophical attention, but no one has noted the structural similarities of these various scenarios or the implications of a proposed approach to one for how the others should be approached. That is the ambition of this article. In it, seemingly disparate moral phenomena—blunt rules, preemptive restrictions, moral blackmail, complicity, retreat and proportional response, and the duty (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation
Moral tragedies, supreme emergencies and national-defence.Daniel Statman - 2006 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (3):311–322.details abstract Assume that some group, A, is under a serious threat from some other group, B. The only way group A can defend itself is by using lethal force against group B, but the standard conditions for using force in self‐defence are not met. Ought group A to avoid the use of force even if this means yielding to an aggressive, evil power? Most people would resist this conclusion, yet given the violation of essential conditions for self‐defence, this resistance is (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 8 citations
Deterrence and the Just Distribution of Harm: DANIEL M. FARRELL.Daniel M. Farrell - 1995 - Social Philosophy and Policy* 12 (2):220-240.details It is extraordinary, when one thinks about it, how little attention has been paid by theorists of the nature and justification of punishment to the idea that punishment is essentially a matter of self-defense. H. L. A. Hart, for example, in his famous “Prolegomenon to the Principles of Punishment,” is clearly committed to the view that, at bottom, there are just three directions in which a plausible theory of punishment can go: we can try to justify punishment on purely consequentialist (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 5 citations

1