On Kant's own retributive framework, punishment is justified only insofar as it respects the rational agency of the wrongdoer, not merely because suffering balances a moral ledger.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Kant(as used in epistemology and metaphysics): Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was an influential German philosopher who argued that our minds shape how we experience reality, and that we can only truly know things as they appear to us, not as they are in themselves.
Retributive framework(as the type of justice system Anselm supposedly assumes): A system of justice based on punishment—the idea that wrongdoing deserves to be punished in equal measure, like 'an eye for an eye.'
justified(Epistemological discussion of Socratic wisdom in The Apology): Having beliefs formed with adequate evidence or through reliable belief-forming processes, distinct from the ability to demonstrate one's justification to an interrogator.
moral ledger(as the flawed way of thinking about punishment that Kant rejects): A metaphor comparing morality to accounting: the idea of keeping score where bad actions create a 'debt' that must be 'paid back' through suffering.

Based on where you are in your exploration