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 Negative retributivism is problematic.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Negative retributivism seems to justify using people merely as a means (within retributive limits) for promoting the greater good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Negative retributivism sets only upper bounds on punishment, leaving all decisions below that threshold to consequentialist calculation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Allowing consequentialist reasoning within retributive limits permits punishing innocents lightly if social utility demands it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Kant's categorical imperative prohibits treating persons merely as means regardless of whether the violation is partial or total.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A coherent theory of punishment must explain why desert generates positive reasons to punish, not merely side-constraints on other goals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Negative retributivism, as Moore notes, cannot distinguish between a just punishment and a fortuitously useful one that happens to stay within desert limits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If desert has genuine moral weight, it must sometimes positively require proportionate punishment rather than merely permitting lesser responses.
      ?

      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.