Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Punishment of wrongdoers is justified by the moral desert of the offender.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Desert claims require a robust notion of free will that is undermined by deterministic causal accounts of human behavior.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If an offender's wrongful act is the product of factors beyond their control, the moral basis for desert collapses.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Neuroscientific and social-scientific evidence increasingly supports causal explanations that erode the control required for genuine desert.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Rawls argued that natural talents and social circumstances are morally arbitrary, and character is shaped by both.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If an agent's disposition to offend is substantially constituted by morally arbitrary factors, punishing them for acting on that disposition cannot be justified by desert alone.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
A just institutional practice must be justified by its forward-looking effects on social cooperation, not backward-looking metaphysical desert.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
Wrongdoers morally deserve punishment for their wrongful acts.
?
How convincing is this?
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.