Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Retributivists who fail to consider variation in offender... — Carmelics

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

Home/Justice & Punishment

History Edit See Inverse

Retributivists who fail to consider variation in offenders' actual or anticipated experiences of punishment are punishing disproportionally.

Justice & Punishment

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

1 reason for

2 reasons against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

?

1.Retributivists who fail to consider variation in offenders' actual or anticipated experiences of punishment are not measuring punishment severity properly.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Not measuring punishment severity properly leads to disproportionate punishment.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

2 perspectives

Reason against 1 of 2

?

1.Punishment severity is properly measured by the objective deprivation imposed, not subjective experience, ensuring equal treatment under law.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Incorporating subjective experience into sentencing creates arbitrary disparities based on morally irrelevant personal characteristics.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Moore and Kant ground proportionality in the gravity of the offense itself, not in the offender's psychological constitution.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reason against 2 of 2

?

1.Practical epistemic limitations make reliable assessment of anticipated subjective experience of punishment systematically impossible.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.A proportionality standard that cannot be reliably operationalized fails as a workable principle of justice, per Hart's demand for institutional feasibility.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Topics

Justice & Punishment

Related

A proportionality standard that cannot be reliably operationalized fails as a wo...Incorporating subjective experience into sentencing creates arbitrary disparitie...Moore and Kant ground proportionality in the gravity of the offense itself, not ...Not measuring punishment severity properly leads to disproportionate punishment.

+3 moreShow less

Practical epistemic limitations make reliable assessment of anticipated subjecti...Punishment severity is properly measured by the objective deprivation imposed, n...Retributivists who fail to consider variation in offenders' actual or anticipate...

Similar

Retributivists who fail to consider variation in offenders' actual or ...93%Not measuring punishment severity properly leads to disproportionate p...82%Most offenders are unaware either that their acts are subject to punis...79%Retributivism captures the widely shared sense that it is always or ne...79%

Source

AI-extracted

SEP: justice-retributive

View source passageHide passage

Retributivists who fail to consider variation in offenders' actual or anticipated experiences of punishment are not measuring punishment severity properly and are therefore punishing disproportionally. (2009: 215; see also Bronsteen et al. 2009: 1068–1072)

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 3 (1 for, 2 against)
Edits: 1 edit