Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Communicative retributivism may be the best default posit... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Communicative retributivism may be the best default position for retributivists.

    Justice & Punishment
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Retributive justifications for the hard treatment element of punishment seem inadequate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Communicative retributivism holds that censure is deserved for wrongdoing, but hard treatment is at best justified either instrumentally (for deterrence or incapacitation) or to give meaning to the censure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Antony Duff's communicative framework presupposes a shared moral community between offender and state that is empirically absent in unjust or racially stratified societies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory that assumes legitimate moral dialogue between punisher and punished cannot be a defensible default when the conditions for that dialogue are structurally compromised.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A retributivism grounded in desert alone avoids this communitarian precondition and is therefore more robust across varied social conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Pure retributivists like Michael Moore argue hard treatment is intrinsically deserved as a moral response to culpable wrongdoing, not merely instrumental.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If hard treatment requires no communicative justification to be deserved, then communicative retributivism adds unnecessary complexity without resolving the core retributive intuition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Justice & Punishment

    Related

    A retributivism grounded in desert alone avoids this communitarian precondition ...A theory that assumes legitimate moral dialogue between punisher and punished ca...Antony Duff's communicative framework presupposes a shared moral community betwe...Communicative retributivism holds that censure is deserved for wrongdoing, but h...
    +3 moreShow less
    If hard treatment requires no communicative justification to be deserved, then c...Pure retributivists like Michael Moore argue hard treatment is intrinsically des...Retributive justifications for the hard treatment element of punishment seem ina...

    Similar

    Positive retributivism is favored over negative retributivism.87%Negative retributivism is problematic.84%Negative retributivism, as standardly framed, contains a contradiction...83%Negative retributivism is framed as the view that it is impermissible ...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid
    SEP: justice-retributive
    Discussion of communicative retributivism
    View source passageHide passage
    Communicative retributivism is another variation on retributivism, this time embracing skepticism that the hard treatment element of punishment is itself deserved. What is left then is the thought that censure is deserved for wrongdoing, but that hard treatment is at best justified either instrumentally, for deterrence or incapacitation, or to give meaning to the censure (see Duff 2001: 29–30, 97; Tadros 2011: ch. 5). Insofar as retributive justifications for the hard treatment element of punishment seem inadequate—see section 5—this may be the best default position for retributivists.
    Extraction notes

    The passage explicitly states that insofar as retributive justifications for hard treatment seem inadequate, communicative retributivism "may be the best default position for retributivists," directly linking the two premises to the conclusion.

    Validity:

    Confidence: The argument structure is fairly clear: the inadequacy of retributive justifications for hard treatment is offered as a reason to adopt communicative retributivism as a fallback.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit