Why Do We Resist Hard Incompatibilism? Thoughts on Freedom and Punishment
Michael Louis Corrado
University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law
October 1, 2011
The Future of Punishment, ed. Thomas Nadelhoffer (Oxford 2013)
UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1936665
One of the most difficult challenges for the “hard incompatibilist” is to deal with the overwhelming objections to the therapeutic/incapacitative approach to crime control that seems to follow naturally from his theory. See, for example, Pereboom’s Living without Free Will, Chapter 6. Responding to this challenge requires the hard determinist (1) to find a way to distinguish between those who have traditionally been found responsible for their crimes and those who have been found not to be responsible; and (2) to justify the infliction of intentionally harsh treatment on at least some of those who fall into the first category. I attempt to develop a theory that satisfies both those requirements.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 37
Date posted: October 2, 2011 ; Last revised: September 12, 2013
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 2.422 seconds