Retributive Theory’s Restorative Corollary
According to retributivism, what justifies punishment is a wrongdoer's desert. Critics argue that retributivists fail to provide sufficient justification for punishment. Herbert Morris offers the type of justification critics demand, providing an account of punishment that: 1) values autonomy,...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Others |
| Published: |
Scholarship @ Claremont
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/1076 http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2251&context=cmc_theses |
| Summary: | According to retributivism, what justifies punishment is a wrongdoer's desert. Critics argue that retributivists fail to provide sufficient justification for punishment. Herbert Morris offers the type of justification critics demand, providing an account of punishment that: 1) values autonomy, and 2) appeals to the principle of fairness. Punishment, in this account, restores equilibrium of benefits and burdens with respect to autonomy. Since punishment largely ignores the autonomy of the victim, however, punishment alone seems unable to ensure justice. In order to provide a more complete account of justice, I contend that one must be committed to retributivism and restoration. Indeed, restoration of the victim’s autonomy may be understood to be part of a completed deployment of the rationale for punishment. |
|---|