|
||||
|
||||
Kant's Theory of PunishmentThom BrooksDurham University July 15, 2003 Utilitas, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 206 - 224, 2003 Abstract: The most widespread interpretation amongst contemporary theorists of Kant's theory of punishment is that it is retributivist. On the contrary, I will argue there are very different senses in which Kant discusses punishment. He endorses retribution for moral law transgressions and consequentialist considerations for positive law violations. When these standpoints are taken into consideration, Kant's theory of punishment is more coherent and unified than previously thought. This reading uncovers a new problem in Kant's theory of punishment. By assuming a potential offender's intentional disposition as Kant does without knowing it for certain, we further exacerbate the opportunity for misdiagnosis - although the assumption of individual criminal culpability may be all we can reasonably be expected to use. While this difficulty is not lost on Kant, it continues to remain with us today, making Kant's theory of punishment far more relevant than previously thought.
Keywords: Kant, retribution, retributivism, deontology, consequentialism, punishment, reasonable doubt, natural law JEL Classification: K00 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: January 16, 2013Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.281 seconds