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 Retributive justice is an appealing theory of punishment.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Retributive intuitions about deserved suffering are products of evolved revenge psychology, not reliable moral tracking mechanisms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral intuitions with identifiable non-epistemic causal origins lose their evidential weight for grounding normative theories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the intuitive appeal cited as direct support for retributivism undermines rather than vindicates its normative authority.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's retributivism, the tradition's strongest philosophical grounding, presupposes libertarian free will that most contemporary philosophers reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without robust agent-causation, the foundational claim that offenders categorically deserve suffering for past acts becomes incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory whose deepest moral justification collapses under mainstream metaphysical commitments cannot be deemed straightforwardly appealing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Retributive justice has direct intuitive support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Retributive justice provides a better account of when punishment is justifiable than alternative accounts of punishment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Retributive justice can be tied to deeper moral principles.
      ?

      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.