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
    The argument that retributivism justifies punishment bett... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The argument that retributivism justifies punishment better than consequentialism is not conclusive.

    Justice & Punishment
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Retributivism's core justification—that punishment is deserved—is circular, as 'desert' presupposes the very moral framework it claims to ground.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.H.L.A. Hart showed in 'Punishment and Responsibility' that no single theory fully justifies punishment's general aim and its particular distribution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A justification that cannot stand without begging the question fails the basic standard of being 'better' than its rivals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Restorative justice frameworks, as developed by Howard Zehr, provide victim-centered accountability without presupposing retributive desert or consequentialist calculus.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a third framework can achieve punishment's legitimate aims more coherently, the retributivism-versus-consequentialism debate is rendered a false dilemma.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A comparative claim of superiority is inconclusive when the comparison class is artificially restricted to two rivals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The argument that retributivism justifies punishment better than consequentialism presupposes that punishment is justifiable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The argument presupposes that there are no alternatives that are better than both retributivism and consequentialism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Both of these presuppositions can be challenged.
      ?

      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 comparative claim of superiority is inconclusive when the comparison class is ...A justification that cannot stand without begging the question fails the basic s...Both of these presuppositions can be challenged.H.L.A. Hart showed in 'Punishment and Responsibility' that no single theory full...
    +5 moreShow less
    If a third framework can achieve punishment's legitimate aims more coherently, t...Restorative justice frameworks, as developed by Howard Zehr, provide victim-cent...Retributivism's core justification—that punishment is deserved—is circular, as '...The argument presupposes that there are no alternatives that are better than bot...The argument that retributivism justifies punishment better than consequentialis...

    Similar

    The argument that retributivism justifies punishment better than conse...97%Reid's second argument depends on a retributivist conception of punish...86%Hybrid accounts of punishment may be subject to some of the same objec...86%For both, a full justification of punishment will be 'mixed', appealin...86%

    Source

    AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid
    SEP: justice-retributive
    View source passageHide passage
    And the argument that retributivism justifies punishment better than consequentialism presupposes that punishment is justifiable (for criticism of this premise, see Golash 2005; Boonin 2008), and that there are no alternatives that are better than both (for three alternatives, see Quinn 1985; Tadros 2011; Lacey & Pickard 2015a).
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The passage explicitly states the two presuppositions and cites critics who challenge each one, which together support the conclusion that the argument for retributivism over consequentialism is not conclusive.

    Confidence: The text explicitly raises two objections to the retributivist argument: (1) punishment may not be justifiable at all, and (2) there may be alternatives better than both. Reasonably clear argumentative structure.

    Details

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