Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Restoration of Retribution

Analysis 32 (4):131 - 135 (1972)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. A philosophical investigation of punishment.Rebecca Pates - unknown
    Neither currently prevalent justifications of punishment, nor a modified, contractarian version of a justification that I develop here, can be used to justify actual state punishment, even if some forms of punishment may remain legitimate. I argue in this thesis that alternative punitive practices such as developed by some Canadian aboriginal communities are more likely to conform to the criteria of punitive justice developed by standard justifications, as well as being more likely to conform to criteria developed in feminist ethics.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Retributivists! The Harm Principle Is Not for You!Patrick Tomlin - 2014 - Ethics 124 (2):272-298.
    Retributivism is often explicitly or implicitly assumed to be compatible with the harm principle, since the harm principle (in some guises) concerns the content of the criminal law, while retributivism concerns the punishment of those that break the law. In this essay I show that retributivism should not be endorsed alongside any version of the harm principle. In fact, retributivists should reject all attempts to see the criminal law only through (other) person-affecting concepts or “grievance” morality, since they should endorse (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Personhood, Equality, and a Possible Justification for Criminal Punishment.Liat Levanon - 2014 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 27 (2):439-472.
    The article examines the relationship between a wrongdoer and his victim. Based on this examination, a justification for criminal punishment is proposed. It is argued that crime violates thea prioriequality of constituent boundaries and of infinite human value between the wrongdoer and the victim. Criminal punishment re-equalizes respective boundaries and infinite human value. To develop this argument, the article observes how subject-subject boundaries are essential for the formation of separateness between subjects - separateness which is recognized and acknowledged by them (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Mismeasuring “unfair advantage”: A response to Michael Davis. [REVIEW]David Dolinko - 1994 - Law and Philosophy 13 (4):493 - 524.
    One prominent contemporary retributivist theory is built on the notion that crime yields an “unfair advantage” over law-abiding citizens which punishment removes or nullifies. Michael Davis has defended this theory by constructing a market model of “unfair advantage” that he contends answers critics' objections to the retributivist enterprise. I seek to demonstrate the inadequacy of Davis's approach, arguing in particular that the market model rests on an incoherent notion of “demand” and would not, even if coherent, link “unfair advantage” to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Punishment, the New Retributivism, and Political Philosophy.Ted Honderich - 1984 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series 18:117-147.
    This paper will in good part concern six arguments taken as making up what is called the New Retributivism. It will also have to do with a seventh retributivist argument, and with the unexamined idea that reflection on punishment can lead a life of its own, independently of political philosophy. Both that idea and the arguments bear on the main question of whether punishment in our societies is right or wrong. It is a question not worn to a frazzle, as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Time and Retribution.Patrick Tomlin - 2014 - Law and Philosophy 33 (5):655-682.
    Retributivists believe that punishment can be deserved, and that deserved punishment is intrinsically good or important. They also believe that certain crimes deserve certain quantities of punishment. On the plausible assumption that the overall amount of any given punishment is a function of its severity and duration, we might think that retributivists would be indifferent as to whether a punishment were long and light or short and sharp, provided the offender gets the overall amount of punishment he deserves. In this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Punishment Theory’s Golden Half Century: A Survey of Developments from 1957 to 2007. [REVIEW]Michael Davis - 2009 - The Journal of Ethics 13 (1):73 - 100.
    This paper describes developments in punishment theory since the middle of the twentieth century. After the mid–1960s, what Stanley I. Benn called “preventive theories of punishment”—whether strictly utilitarian or more loosely consequentialist like his—entered a long and steep decline, beginning with the virtual disappearance of reform theory in the 1970s. Crowding out preventive theories were various alternatives generally (but, as I shall argue, misleadingly) categorized as “retributive”. These alternatives include both old theories (such as the education theory) resurrected after many (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • What's 'Wrong' in Contractualism?Matt Matravers - 1996 - Utilitas 8 (3):329.
    Brian Barry's Justice as Impartiality is an important book. One of its contributions to the discipline is a characteristically clear presentation of what follows if one accepts a commitment to equality, and the reasonableness of continuing and profound disagreements about the nature of the good life. I take the argument of Justice as Impartiality to be an important next step in the attempt to give an account of the content of justice which is impartial, fair, or neutral between conceptions of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A Normative Theory of the Clean Hands Defense.Ori J. Herstein - 2011 - Legal Theory 17 (3):171-208.
    What is the clean hands defense (CHD) normatively about? Courts designate court integrity as the CHD's primary norm. Yet, while the CHD may at times further court integrity, it is not fully aligned with court integrity. In addition to occasionally instrumentally furthering certain goods (e.g., court legitimacy, judge integrity, deterrence), the CHD embodies two judicially undetected norms: retribution and tu quoque (“you too!”). Tu quoque captures the moral intuition that wrongdoers are in no position to blame, condemn, or make claims (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Why Criminal Law? The Role of Utilitarianism: A Response to Husak. [REVIEW]C. M. V. Clarkson - 2008 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (2):131-135.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark