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
    Consequentialist justifications permit punishing the inno... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Any adequate justification of punishment must be basically consequentialist.

    Consequentialist justifications permit punishing the innocent whenever doing so maximizes net welfare, which violates a near-universal constraint on just punishment.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Punishing innocents violates their fundamental right to fair treatment regardless of consequences, a constraint that precedes utilitarian calculation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Systems permitting innocent punishment erode public trust and rule of law, ultimately reducing long-term welfare more than gains from any single act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A moral theory that licenses injustice to individuals for aggregate benefit fails to respect persons as ends in themselves, not mere welfare vessels.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Consequentialists can build constraints into their theory: punishing innocents typically has hidden costs (injustice, deterrence failure) that outweigh benefits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim assumes consequentialists must ignore side-effects; sophisticated consequentialism includes rights and dignity as intrinsic welfare components.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Deontological 'near-universal constraints' lack justification without appeal to consequences—their force may ultimately rest on the very framework they reject.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Justice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    A moral theory that licenses injustice to individuals for aggregate benefit fail...Any adequate justification of punishment must be basically consequentialist.Consequentialists can build constraints into their theory: punishing innocents t...Deontological 'near-universal constraints' lack justification without appeal to ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Punishing innocents violates their fundamental right to fair treatment regardles...Systems permitting innocent punishment erode public trust and rule of law, ultim...The claim assumes consequentialists must ignore side-effects; sophisticated cons...

    Details

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