Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Honor and Revenge: A Theory of PunishmentPunishment as Crime Prevention

Honor and Revenge: A Theory of Punishment: Punishment as Crime Prevention [The deterrence theory of punishment is more accurately called the crime prevention theory, as deterrence is one of several possible methods of inflicting harm for the sake of crime prevention. Deterrence includes General Deterrence (punishing one person to influence others) and Specific Deterrence (punishing one person to deter him from committing future wrongs). Other methods include incapacitation (physically preventing the wrongdoer from committing future crimes) and rehabilitation (inculcating moral values in the wrongdoer in order that he not commit future wrongs). The basic objection to any crime prevention theory is that it appears to presuppose the utilitarian moral theory. But it is widely accepted that utilitarianism is an unacceptable moral theory, for it violates basic moral intuitions such as the principle that one may not use people ameans to the greater social good, or that the end does not justify the means. If the utilitarian theory is rejected, then specific and general deterrence must be rejected as well. However, incapacitation and rehabilitation do not presuppose the utilitarian moral theory. They can rather be accommodated within a deontological moral theory, so long as it incorporates the Doctrine of Double Effect. Thus it turns out that at least these two methods, contrary to the Abolitionists, can be morally justified. Still, it seems clear that the most fundamental rationalization for punishment is retributive.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Honor and Revenge: A Theory of PunishmentPunishment as Crime Prevention

Download PDF
26 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/honor-and-revenge-a-theory-of-punishment-punishment-as-crime-olqe0TUwKF
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Copyright
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013
ISBN
978-94-007-4844-6
Pages
19 –45
DOI
10.1007/978-94-007-4845-3_2
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[The deterrence theory of punishment is more accurately called the crime prevention theory, as deterrence is one of several possible methods of inflicting harm for the sake of crime prevention. Deterrence includes General Deterrence (punishing one person to influence others) and Specific Deterrence (punishing one person to deter him from committing future wrongs). Other methods include incapacitation (physically preventing the wrongdoer from committing future crimes) and rehabilitation (inculcating moral values in the wrongdoer in order that he not commit future wrongs). The basic objection to any crime prevention theory is that it appears to presuppose the utilitarian moral theory. But it is widely accepted that utilitarianism is an unacceptable moral theory, for it violates basic moral intuitions such as the principle that one may not use people ameans to the greater social good, or that the end does not justify the means. If the utilitarian theory is rejected, then specific and general deterrence must be rejected as well. However, incapacitation and rehabilitation do not presuppose the utilitarian moral theory. They can rather be accommodated within a deontological moral theory, so long as it incorporates the Doctrine of Double Effect. Thus it turns out that at least these two methods, contrary to the Abolitionists, can be morally justified. Still, it seems clear that the most fundamental rationalization for punishment is retributive.]

Published: Aug 1, 2012

Keywords: Death Penalty; Crime Prevention; Moral Theory; Great Good; Innocent Person

There are no references for this article.