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 Positive retributivism holds that desert provides an in-principle sufficient reason for punishment, though only in principle.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Desert claims presuppose robust metaphysical free will, which hard determinists like Derk Pereboom argue is empirically undermined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If agents lack the sourcehood required for basic desert, punishment cannot be sufficiently justified by desert alone, even in principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Consequentialists like Bentham hold that suffering is intrinsically bad, making the deliberate infliction of pain require positive justification beyond mere desert.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A reason that is 'sufficient in principle' but routinely overridden by costs is functionally indistinguishable from a prima facie reason, collapsing positive into negative retributivism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.An offender's desert provides a reason in favour of punishment: the state should punish those found guilty to the extent that they deserve, because they deserve it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.There are good reasons — to do with the costs, both material and moral, of punishment — why we should not even try to punish all the guilty.
      ?

      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.