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 is favored over negative retributivism.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Negative retributivism's constraint that only the guilty may be punished is fully compatible with non-instrumentalizing desert-based side-constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory need not positively mandate punishment to treat offenders as ends in themselves; forbidding punishment of the innocent suffices to respect persons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Positive retributivism's obligation to punish all guilty parties risks treating punishment as an impersonal cosmic debt rather than a response to a particular person's wrong.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.H.L.A. Hart's mixed theory demonstrates that distributive justice (who may be punished) can be grounded in desert without requiring desert to justify punishment's general aim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conflating the question of punishment's justifying aim with the question of its proper distribution illegitimately burdens negative retributivism with a problem it was never designed to solve.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.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

    • 2.The thought that punishment treats wrongdoers as they deserve to be treated addresses this problem.
      ?

      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.