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
    Deterrent punishment is permissible. — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Deterrent punishment is permissible.

    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.Punishment (in particular deterrent punishment) is a species of societal self-defence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.To defend oneself against a wrongful attack is not to use the attacker merely as a means, or to fail to show him the respect that is his due.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Deterrent punishment treats the individual offender as a means to influence the behavior of others who have not yet acted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Using a person's suffering as a tool to shape third-party conduct violates the Kantian imperative to treat persons as ends in themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The societal self-defence analogy fails because self-defence targets the actual threat-source, not a symbolic example made of one person for others' benefit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Deterrence theory requires that punishment be calibrated to its preventive effect on potential offenders, not to the moral desert of the actual offender.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Punishing beyond or below what an offender deserves — as deterrence often demands — constitutes a fundamental injustice recognised since Kant's 'Metaphysics of Morals'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A system that permits instrumentalising the innocent or over-punishing the guilty for social utility collapses the moral distinction between punishment and scapegoating.
      ?

      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 system that permits instrumentalising the innocent or over-punishing the guilt...Deterrence theory requires that punishment be calibrated to its preventive effec...Deterrent punishment treats the individual offender as a means to influence the ...Punishing beyond or below what an offender deserves — as deterrence often demand...
    +4 moreShow less
    Punishment (in particular deterrent punishment) is a species of societal self-de...The societal self-defence analogy fails because self-defence targets the actual ...To defend oneself against a wrongful attack is not to use the attacker merely as...Using a person's suffering as a tool to shape third-party conduct violates the K...

    Similar

    The punishment of those who commit crimes is permissible.92%Wrongdoing deserves punishment.83%Retributive punishment requires that the subject be responsible for wr...81%Consequentialism implies that punishment of the innocent is justified ...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: legal-punishment
    View source passageHide passage
    Perhaps the most influential example of a mixed account begins by recognizing that the question of punishment’s justification is in fact several different questions, which may be answered by appeal to different considerations. In particular, Hart (1968: 9–10) pointed out that we may ask about punishment, as about any social institution, what compelling rationale there is to maintain the institution (that is, what values or aims it fosters) and also what considerations should govern the institution. The compelling rationale will itself entail certain constraints: e.g., the rationale of deterren...

    Details

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