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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Foreseeable harmful effects on a criminal's family that result from imprisonment do not constitute punishment.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The doctrine of double effect does not exculpate agents from moral responsibility when foreseeable harm is severe, systematic, and disproportionate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A state that predictably devastates innocent families through incarceration policies inflicts de facto punishment on those families, regardless of declared intent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction between intended and merely foreseen effects cannot bear full moral weight when the foreseen effects are structurally guaranteed outcomes of the punitive system itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Antony Duff's communicative theory of punishment holds that punishment constitutes the whole complex of burdens imposed, not merely those narrowly intended by the punisher.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If family members of the incarcerated systematically suffer economic ruin, social stigma, and psychological harm as constitutive outcomes of imprisonment, the state's act of punishing cannot be cleanly severed from those effects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The punisher must inflict hard treatment intentionally, not as an accident and not as a side-effect of pursuing some other end.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The harms to a criminal's family from imprisonment are foreseeable side-effects, not purposely inflicted as part of the punishment for the crime.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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