Switch to: References

Citations of:

Censure and Sanctions

Law and Philosophy 15 (4):407-415 (1996)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Justice Without Retribution: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Stakeholder Views and Practical Implications.Farah Focquaert, Gregg Caruso, Elizabeth Shaw & Derk Pereboom - 2018 - Neuroethics 13 (1):1-3.
    Within the United States, the most prominent justification for criminal punishment is retributivism. This retributivist justification for punishment maintains that punishment of a wrongdoer is justified for the reason that she deserves something bad to happen to her just because she has knowingly done wrong—this could include pain, deprivation, or death. For the retributivist, it is the basic desert attached to the criminal’s immoral action alone that provides the justification for punishment. This means that the retributivist position is not reducible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Corporate Essence and Identity in Criminal Law.Mihailis E. Diamantis - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 154 (4):955-966.
    How can we know whether we are punishing the same corporation that committed some past crime? Though central to corporate criminal justice, legal theorists and philosophers have yet to address the basic question of how corporate identity persists through time. Simple cases, where crime and punishment are close in time and the corporation has changed little, can mislead us into thinking an answer is always easy to come by. The issue becomes more complicated when corporate criminals undergo any number of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Justice without Retribution: An Epistemic Argument against Retributive Criminal Punishment.Gregg D. Caruso - 2018 - Neuroethics 13 (1):13-28.
    Within the United States, the most prominent justification for criminal punishment is retributivism. This retributivist justification for punishment maintains that punishment of a wrongdoer is justified for the reason that she deserves something bad to happen to her just because she has knowingly done wrong—this could include pain, deprivation, or death. For the retributivist, it is the basic desert attached to the criminal’s immoral action alone that provides the justification for punishment. This means that the retributivist position is not reducible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Lessons from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: A Case Study in Retributive and Corrective Justice for Harm to the Environment (2nd edition).James Liszka - 2010 - Ethics and the Environment 15 (2):1.
    The settlements surrounding the Exxon Valdez oil spill prove to be an interesting case of retributive and corrective justice in regard to damage to the ecology of the commons, particularly in light of the recent Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico. After reviewing the harm done to the ecology of Prince William Sound by the spill, and an account of Exxon Corporation’s responsibility, I examine the details of the litigation, particularly the Supreme Court decision in this matter. In (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Death Penalty Debate: Four Problems and New Philosophical Perspectives.Masaki Ichinose - June 2017 - Journal of Practical Ethics 5 (1):53-80.
    This paper aims at bringing a new philosophical perspective to the current debate on the death penalty through a discussion of peculiar kinds of uncertainties that surround the death penalty. I focus on laying out the philosophical argument, with the aim of stimulating and restructuring the death penalty debate. I will begin by describing views about punishment that argue in favour of either retaining the death penalty (‘retentionism’) or abolishing it (‘abolitionism’). I will then argue that we should not ignore (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Taking Deterrence Seriously: The Wide-Scope Deterrence Theory of Punishment.Lee Hsin-wen - 2017 - Criminal Justice Ethics 36 (1):2-24.
    A deterrence theory of punishment holds that the institution of criminal punishment is morally justified because it serves to deter crime. Because the fear of external sanction is an important incentive in crime deterrence, the deterrence theory is often associated with the idea of severe, disproportionate punishment. An objection to this theory holds that hope of escape renders even the severest punishment inapt and irrelevant. -/- This article revisits the concept of deterrence and defend a more plausible deterrence theory of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Nonconsensual Neurocorrectives and Bodily Integrity: a Reply to Shaw and Barn.Thomas Douglas - 2016 - Neuroethics 12 (1):107-118.
    In this issue, Elizabeth Shaw and Gulzaar Barn offer a number of replies to my arguments in ‘Criminal Rehabilitation Through Medical Intervention: Moral Liability and the Right to Bodily Integrity’, Journal of Ethics. In this article I respond to some of their criticisms.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Normativity, probability, and meta-vagueness.Masaki Ichinose - 2017 - Synthese 194 (10):3879-3900.
    This paper engages with a specific problem concerning the relationship between descriptive and normative claims. Namely, if we understand that descriptive claims frequently contain normative assertions, and vice versa, how then do we interpret the traditionally rigid distinction that is made between the two, as ’Hume’s law’ or Moore’s ’naturalistic fallacy’ argument offered. In particular, Kripke’s interpretation of Wittgenstein’s ’rule-following paradox’ is specially focused upon in order to re-consider the rigid distinction. As such, the paper argues that if descriptive and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Is Coercive Treatment of Offenders Morally Acceptable? On the Deficiency of the Debate.Jesper Ryberg - 2015 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 9 (4):619-631.
    Is it morally acceptable to instigate criminal offenders to participate in rehabilitative treatment by offering treatment in return for early release from prison? Some theorists have supported such treatment schemes by pointing to the beneficial consequences that follow from the treatment. Others have suggested that the schemes are unacceptably coercive, which implies that consent becomes an illusion. This paper argues that the discussion—with clear parallels to debates of other healthcare treatment offers in medical ethics—has adopted a too narrow focus. By (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Iniuria Migrandi: Criminalization of Immigrants and the Basic Principles of the Criminal Law. [REVIEW]Alessandro Spena - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (3):635-657.
    In this paper I am specifically concerned with a normative assessment, from the perspective of a principled criminal law theory, of norms criminalizing illegal immigration. The overarching question I will dwell on is one specifically regarding the way of using criminal law which is implied in the enactment of such kinds of norms. My thesis will essentially be that it constitutes a veritable abuse of criminal law. In two senses at least: first, in the sense that by criminalizing illegal immigration (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Philosophy of Criminal Law: Extending the Debates. [REVIEW]Douglas Husak - 2013 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 7 (2):351-365.
    Larry Alexander and Peter Westen each critically examine different topics from my recent collection of essays, The Philosophy of Criminal Law. Alexander focuses on my “Rapes Without Rapists,” “Mistake of Law and Culpability,” and “Already Punished Enough.” Westen offers a more extended commentary on my “Transferred Intent.” I briefly reply to each critic in turn and try to extend the debates in new directions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Collective Agents and Communicative Theories of Punishment.Bill Wringe - 2012 - Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (4):436-456.
    This paper considers the applicability of expressive theories of punishment to the punishment of corporate entities. The author argues that although arguments which suggest that the denunciatory account is superior to a communicative account in paradigmatic cases of punishment cannot be transferred straightforwardly to cover this kind of case, there are other reasons, connected with the different attitudes we have to regret and remorse in individual and collective cases, for preferring a communicative to a denunciatory account here.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Smilansky, Arneson, and the asymmetry of desert.Jeffrey Moriarty - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 162 (3):537-545.
    Desert plays an important role in most contemporary theories of retributive justice, but an unimportant role in most contemporary theories of distributive justice. Saul Smilansky has recently put forward a defense of this asymmetry. In this study, I argue that it fails. Then, drawing on an argument of Richard Arneson’s, I suggest an alternative consequentialist rationale for the asymmetry. But while this shows that desert cannot be expected to play the same role in distributive justice that it can play in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Do CEOS get Paid too much?Jeffrey Moriarty - 2005 - Business Ethics Quarterly 15 (2):257-281.
    Abstract:In 2003, CEOs of the 365 largest U.S. corporations were paid on average $8 million, 301 times as much as factory workers. This paper asks whether CEOs get paid too much. Appealing to widely recognized moral values, I distinguish three views of justice in wages: the agreement view, the desert view, and the utility view. I argue that, no matter which view is correct, CEOs get paid too much. I conclude by offering two ways CEO pay might be reduced.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  • Fair Play, Political Obligation, and Punishment.Zachary Hoskins - 2011 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (1):53-71.
    This paper attempts to establish that, and explain why, the practice of punishing offenders is in principle morally permissible. My account is a nonstandard version of the fair play view, according to which punishment 's permissibility derives from reciprocal obligations shared by members of a political community, understood as a mutually beneficial, cooperative venture. Most fair play views portray punishment as an appropriate means of removing the unfair advantage an offender gains relative to law-abiding members of the community. Such views (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Retributivist Justice in an Unjust Society.Okeoghene Odudu - 2003 - Ratio Juris 16 (3):416-431.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Is it better that ten guilty persons go free than that one innocent person be convicted?Vidar Halvorsen - 2004 - Criminal Justice Ethics 23 (2):3-13.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Direct paternalism: Criminalizing self‐injurious conduct.Andrew Von Hirsch - 2008 - Criminal Justice Ethics 27 (1):25-33.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Punishment: Consequentialism.David Wood - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (6):455-469.
    Punishment involves deliberating harming individuals. How, then, if at all, is it to be justified? This, the first of three papers on the philosophy of punishment (see also 'Punishment: Nonconsequentialism' and 'Punishment: The Future'), examines attempts to justify the practice or institution according to its consequences. One claim is that punishment reduces crime, and hence the resulting harms. Another is that punishment functions to rehabilitate offenders. A third claim is that punishment (or some forms of punishment) can serve to make (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Us responsibility for war crimes in iraq.J. Angelo Corlett - 2010 - Res Publica 16 (2):227-244.
    This paper examines the recent actions by the United States in Iraq in the light of just war principles, and sets forth a program for holding accountable those most responsible for war crimes in Iraq.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Legal and moral responsibility.Antony Duff - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (6):978-986.
    The paper begins with the plausible view that criminal responsibility should track moral responsibility, and explains its plausibility. A necessary distinction is then drawn between liability and answerability as two dimensions of responsibility, and is shown to underpin the distinction in criminal law between offences and defences. This enables us to distinguish strict liability from strict answerability, and to see that whilst strict criminal liability seems inconsistent with the principle that criminal responsibility should track moral responsibility, strict criminal answerability is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • 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  
  • Crime, Character, and the Evolution of the Penal Message.Adiel Zimran & Netanel Dagan - forthcoming - Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-22.
    Scholars depict punishment as a moral dialogue between the community and the offender, which addresses both the offender’s crime and character. However, how the penal message evolves vis a vis that crime and character as it passes through the different stages of the criminal process has remained under-theorized. This article, building on communicative theory, explores the interrelation between crime and character along the penal process, from sentencing, through prison, to parole release. We argue that in the penal dialogue the relationship (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Criminal Justice and Artificial Intelligence: How Should we Assess the Performance of Sentencing Algorithms?Jesper Ryberg - 2024 - Philosophy and Technology 37 (1):1-15.
    Artificial intelligence is increasingly permeating many types of high-stake societal decision-making such as the work at the criminal courts. Various types of algorithmic tools have already been introduced into sentencing. This article concerns the use of algorithms designed to deliver sentence recommendations. More precisely, it is considered how one should determine whether one type of sentencing algorithm (e.g., a model based on machine learning) would be ethically preferable to another type of sentencing algorithm (e.g., a model based on old-fashioned programming). (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Justice by Algorithm: The Limits of AI in Criminal Sentencing.Isaac Taylor - 2023 - Criminal Justice Ethics 42 (3):193-213.
    Criminal justice systems have traditionally relied heavily on human decision-making, but new technologies are increasingly supplementing the human role in this sector. This paper considers what general limits need to be placed on the use of algorithms in sentencing decisions. It argues that, even once we can build algorithms that equal human decision-making capacities, strict constraints need to be placed on how they are designed and developed. The act of condemnation is a valuable element of criminal sentencing, and using algorithms (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Ethics of Punishment and the Impact Assumption. — Reconsidering the Role of Penal Ethicists.Jesper Ryberg - 2021 - Criminal Justice Ethics 40 (3):235-255.
    Why is the ethics of punishment an important academic field? The standard answer given by philosophers, legal scholars, and other theorists is that academic engagement in the ethics of punishment is justified by the importance of informing and guiding penal practice. In this article, this view is referred to as the Impact Assumption. The purpose of the article is to consider what this assumption implies for the way research within this field should be conducted. First, I argue that the way (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Degrees of Assertability.Sam Carter - 2020 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 104 (1):19-49.
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Volume 104, Issue 1, Page 19-49, January 2022.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • The Enduring Pertinence of the Basic Principle of Retribution☆.Vincent Geeraets - 2021 - Ratio Juris 34 (4):293-314.
    Ratio Juris, Volume 34, Issue 4, Page 293-314, December 2021.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Punishing Moral Animals.Eli Shupe - 2021 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 51 (5):351-366.
    There has been recent speculation that some animals are moral agents. Using a retributivist framework, I argue that if some animals are moral agents, then there are circumstances in which some of them deserve punishment. But who is best situated to punish animal wrongdoers? This paper explores the idea that the answer to this question is humans.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • From relational equality to personal responsibility.Andreas T. Schmidt - 2022 - Philosophical Studies 179 (4):1373-1399.
    According to relational egalitarians, equality is not primarily about the distribution of some good but about people relating to one another as equals. However, compared with other theorists in political philosophy – including other egalitarians – relational egalitarians have said relatively little on what role personal responsibility should play in their theories. For example, is equality compatible with responsibility? Should economic distributions be responsibility-sensitive? This article fills this gap. I develop a relational egalitarian framework for personal responsibility and show that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Sentencing Disparity and Artificial Intelligence.Jesper Ryberg - 2023 - Journal of Value Inquiry 57 (3):447-462.
    The idea of using artificial intelligence as a support system in the sentencing process has attracted increasing attention. For instance, it has been suggested that machine learning algorithms may help in curbing problems concerning inter-judge sentencing disparity. The purpose of the present article is to examine the merits of this possibility. It is argued that, insofar as the unfairness of sentencing disparity is held to reflect a retributivist view of proportionality, it is not necessarily the case that increasing inter-judge uniformity (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Three Rationales for a Legal Right to Mental Integrity.Thomas Douglas & Lisa Forsberg - 2021 - In S. Ligthart, D. van Toor, T. Kooijmans, T. Douglas & G. Meynen (eds.), Neurolaw: Advances in Neuroscience, Justice and Security. Palgrave Macmillan.
    Many states recognize a legal right to bodily integrity, understood as a right against significant, nonconsensual interference with one’s body. Recently, some have called for the recognition of an analogous legal right to mental integrity: a right against significant, nonconsensual interference with one’s mind. In this chapter, we describe and distinguish three different rationales for recognizing such a right. The first appeals to case-based intuitions to establish a distinctive duty not to interfere with others’ minds; the second holds that, if (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Retributivism and the (Lack of) Justification of Proportionality.Jesper Ryberg - 2021 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 15 (3):447-462.
    The principle of proportionality has gained widespread adherence in the modern retributively-dominated era of penal theory. It has often been held that, if one subscribes to a retributivist theory, then one is also committed to proportionality in punishment. In the present article, this assumption is challenged. It is shown that the inference from the fact that one offender has committed a more serious crime than another offender, to the conclusion that this offender should be punished more severely than the other, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On the Possibility and Permissibility of Interpersonal Punishment.Laura Gillespie - 2017 - Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles
    In the dissertation, I consider the permissibility of a familiar set of responses to wrongdoing in our interpersonal relationships—those responses that constitute the imposition of some cost upon the wrongdoer. Some of these responses are, I argue, properly considered punishing, and some of these instances of punishing are in turn permissible. Punishment as I understand it is a broad phenomenon, common in and to all human relationships, and not exclusively or even primarily the domain of the state. Personal interactions expressive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Retributivism, Justification and Credence: The Epistemic Argument Revisited.Sofia M. I. Jeppsson - 2020 - Neuroethics 14 (2):177-190.
    Harming other people is prima facie wrong. Unless we can be very certain that doing so is justified under the circumstances, we ought not to do it. In this paper, I argue that we ought to dismantle harsh retributivist criminal justice systems for this reason; we cannot be sufficiently certain that the harm is justified. Gregg Caruso, Ben Vilhauer and others have previously argued for the same conclusion; however, my own version sidesteps certain controversial premises of theirs. Harsh retributivist criminal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Punishing the Oppressed and the Standing to Blame.Andy Engen - 2020 - Res Philosophica 97 (2):271-295.
    Philosophers have highlighted a dilemma for the criminal law. Unjust, racist policies in the United States have produced conditions in which the dispossessed are more likely to commit crime. This complicity undermines the standing of the state to blame their offenses. Nevertheless, the state has reason to punish those crimes in order to deter future offenses. Tommie Shelby proposes a way out of this dilemma. He separates the state’s right to condemn from its right to punish. I raise doubts about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Demystifying Desert.Gabriel S. Mendlow - 2020 - The Journal of Ethics 24 (3):287-294.
    In his penetrating book on the criminal culpability of children, Gideon Yaffe advances a novel theory of desert. According to the theory, the punishment you deserve for committing a given crime is the punishment the prospect of which would have led you to deliberate correctly about how to act, had that punishment been presented to you beforehand as an inevitable consequence of your committing the crime. Although fascinating and ambitious, Yaffe’s theory of desert struggles as an account of who deserves (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Risk-Based Sentencing and Predictive Accuracy.Jesper Ryberg - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23 (1):251-263.
    The use of risk assessment tools has come to play an increasingly important role in sentencing decisions in many jurisdictions. A key issue in the theoretical discussion of risk assessment concerns the predictive accuracy of such tools. For instance, it has been underlined that most risk assessment instruments have poor to moderate accuracy in most applications. However, the relation between, on the one hand, judgements of the predictive accuracy of a risk assessment tool and, on the other, conclusions concerning the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Approaching or Re-thinking the Realm of Criminal Law?Nicola Lacey - 2020 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 14 (3):307-318.
    In his latest monograph, The Realm of Criminal Law, Antony Duff gives us a further, magisterial statement of the vision of criminal law, its procedural framework, and its sanctioning system, which he has been developing over the past 35 years. This is Duff’s own book-length contribution to the tremendously fruitful collaborative Criminalization project. That project has already generated four edited volumes and two fine monographs by Farmer and Tadros. It will shape the field for decades to come; and it has (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Limits of Blame, by Erin I. Kelly.Nicola Lacey - 2019 - Mind 129 (516):1337-13348.
    The Limits of Blame, by KellyErin I. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018. Pp. 221.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Punishment: Nonconsequentialism.David Wood - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (6):470-482.
    A companion to ‘Punishment: Consequentialism’, and also ‘Punishment: The Future’, this paper examines various nonconsequentialist attempts to justify punishment, that is, attempts that appeal to claims concerning the innate worth or intrinsic character of punishment, quite apart from any consequential good or benefit punishment may be thought to produce. The paper starts with retributive theories, and turns then to the denunciation and expressive theories, before considering combined communicative–retributive theories.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Punishing with Care: treating offenders as equal persons in criminal punishment.Helen Brown Coverdale - 2013 - Dissertation, The London School of Economics and Political Science
    Most punishment theories acknowledge neither the full extent of the harms which punishment risks, nor the caring practices which punishment entails. Consequently, I shall argue, punishment in most of its current conceptualizations is inconsistent with treating offenders as equals qua persons. The nature of criminal punishment, and of our interactions with offenders in punishment decision-making and delivery, risks causing harm to offenders. Harm is normalized when central to definitions of punishment, desensitizing us to unintended harms and obscuring caring practices. Offenders (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Legitimacy of Judicial Responses to Moral Panic: Perceived vs. Normative Legitimacy.Miriam Gur-Arye - 2018 - Criminal Justice Ethics 37 (2):141-163.
    In some instances, the criminal justice system is affected by a moral panic; that is, by an exaggerated social reaction to an assumed threat to moral values. When influenced by moral panic, courts...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Irrational Option Exclusion.Sofia Jeppsson - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (3):537-551.
    In this paper, I describe a hitherto overlooked kind of practical irrationality, which I call irrational option exclusion. An agent who suffers from this problem does not merely fail to act on her best judgement – she fails to realize that the superior action is even an option for her. I furthermore argue that this kind of irrationality is serious enough to undermine moral responsibility. I show that an agent suffering from this problem has compromised reasons-responsiveness, does not really express (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Retributivism and Public Opinion: On the Context Sensitivity of Desert.Göran Duus-Otterström - 2018 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (1):125-142.
    Retributivism may seem wholly uninterested in the fit between penal policy and public opinion, but on one rendition of the theory, here called ‘popular retributivism,’ deserved punishments are constituted by the penal conventions of the community. This paper makes two claims against this view. First, the intuitive appeal of popular retributivism is undermined once we distinguish between context sensitivity and convention sensitivity about desert. Retributivism in general can freely accept context sensitivity without being committed to the stronger notion of convention (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Are ‘Optimistic’ Theories of Criminal Justice Psychologically Feasible? The Probative Case of Civic Republicanism.Victoria McGeer & Friederike Funk - 2017 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 11 (3):523-544.
    ‘Optimistic’ normative theories of criminal justice aim to justify criminal sanction in terms of its reprobative/rehabilitative value rather than its punitive nature as such. But do such theories accord with ordinary intuitions about what constitutes a ‘just’ response to wrongdoing? Recent empirical work on the psychology of punishers suggests that human beings have a ‘brutely retributive’ moral psychology, making them unlikely to endorse normative theories that sacrifice retribution for the sake of reprobation or rehabilitation; it would mean, for example, that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Punishing Adolescents—On Immaturity and Diminished Responsibility.Jesper Ryberg - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (3):327-336.
    Should an adolescent offender be punished more leniently than an adult offender? Many theorists believe the answer to be in the affirmative. According to the diminished culpability model, adolescents are less mature than adults and, therefore, less responsible for their wrongdoings and should consequently be punished less harshly. This article concerns the first part of the model: the relation between immaturity and diminished responsibility. It is argued that this relation faces three normative challenges which do not allow for easy answers (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Preventive Pre-trial Detention without Punishment.Richard L. Lippke - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (2):111-127.
    The pre-trial detention of individuals charged with crimes is viewed by many legal scholars as problematic. Standard arguments against it are that it constitutes legal punishment of individuals not yet convicted of crimes, violates the presumption of innocence, and rests on dubious predictions of future crime. I defend modified and restrained forms of pre-trial detention. I argue that pre-trial detention could be made very different than imprisonment, should be governed by strict criteria, and is warranted, when the evidence of danger (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Giving desert its due.Thomas M. Scanlon - 2013 - Philosophical Explorations 16 (2):101-116.
    I will argue that a desert-based justification for treating a person in a certain way is a justification that holds this treatment to be justified simply by what the person is like and what he or she has done, independent of (1) the fact that treating the person in this way will have good effects (or that treating people like him or her in this way will have such effects); (2) the fact that this treatment is called for by some (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   58 citations  
  • Folk retributivism and the communication confound.Thomas Nadelhoffer, Saeideh Heshmati, Deanna Kaplan & Shaun Nichols - 2013 - Economics and Philosophy 29 (2):235-261.
    Retributivist accounts of punishment maintain that it is right to punish wrongdoers, even if the punishment has no future benefits. Research in experimental economics indicates that people are willing to pay to punish defectors. A complementary line of work in social psychology suggests that people think that it is right to punish wrongdoers. This work suggests that people are retributivists about punishment. However, all of the extant work contains an important potential confound. The target of the punishment is expected to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations