Knowledge Resource Center for Ecological Environment in Arid Area
| DOI | 10.1525/nclr.2020.23.4.565 |
| A TRUCE IN CRIMINAL LAW'S DISTRIBUTIVE PRINCIPLE WARS? | |
| Robinson, Paul H. | |
| 通讯作者 | Robinson, PH |
| 来源期刊 | NEW CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW
 |
| ISSN | 1933-4192 |
| EISSN | 1933-4206 |
| 出版年 | 2020 |
| 卷号 | 23期号:4页码:565-583 |
| 英文摘要 | Crime-control utilitarians and retributivist philosophers have long been at war over the appropriate distributive principle for criminal liability and punishment, with little apparent possibility of reconciliation between the two. In the utilitarians' view, the imposition of punishment can be justified only by the practical benefit that it provides: avoiding future crime. In the retributivists' view, doing justice for past wrongs is a value in itself that requires no further justification. The competing approaches simply use different currencies: fighting future crime versus doing justice for past wrongs. It is argued here that the two are in fact reconcilable, in a fashion. We cannot declare a winner in the distributive principle wars but something more like a truce. Specifically, good utilitarians ought to support a distributive principle based upon desert because the empirical evidence suggests that doing justice for past wrongdoing is likely the most effective and efficient means of controlling future crime. A criminal justice system perceived by the community as conflicting with its principles of justice provokes resistance and subversion, whereas a criminal justice system that earns a reputation for reliably doing justice is one whose moral credibility inspires deference, assistance, and acquiescence, and is more likely to have citizens internalize its norms of what is truly condemnable conduct. Retributivists ought to support empirical desert as a distributive principle because, while it is indeed distinct from deontological desert, there exists an enormous overlap between the two, and it seems likely that empirical desert may be the best practical approximation of deontological desert. Indeed, some philosophers would argue that the two are necessarily the same. |
| 英文关键词 | experimental philosophy social psychology distributive principles empirical desert intuitions of justice internalized norms |
| 类型 | Article |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 收录类别 | ESCI |
| WOS记录号 | WOS:000595740300005 |
| WOS类目 | Law |
| WOS研究方向 | Government & Law |
| 资源类型 | 期刊论文 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.177/qdio/handle/2XILL650/334789 |
| 作者单位 | [Robinson, Paul H.] Univ Penn, Law, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Robinson, Paul H.. A TRUCE IN CRIMINAL LAW'S DISTRIBUTIVE PRINCIPLE WARS?[J],2020,23(4):565-583. |
| APA | Robinson, Paul H..(2020).A TRUCE IN CRIMINAL LAW'S DISTRIBUTIVE PRINCIPLE WARS?.NEW CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW,23(4),565-583. |
| MLA | Robinson, Paul H.."A TRUCE IN CRIMINAL LAW'S DISTRIBUTIVE PRINCIPLE WARS?".NEW CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW 23.4(2020):565-583. |
| 条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 | |||||
| 个性服务 |
| 推荐该条目 |
| 保存到收藏夹 |
| 导出为Endnote文件 |
| 谷歌学术 |
| 谷歌学术中相似的文章 |
| [Robinson, Paul H.]的文章 |
| 百度学术 |
| 百度学术中相似的文章 |
| [Robinson, Paul H.]的文章 |
| 必应学术 |
| 必应学术中相似的文章 |
| [Robinson, Paul H.]的文章 |
| 相关权益政策 |
| 暂无数据 |
| 收藏/分享 |
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
