Rejecting retributivism : free will, punishment, and criminal justice
著者
書誌事項
Rejecting retributivism : free will, punishment, and criminal justice
(Law and the cognitive sciences)
Cambridge University Press, 2021
- : hbk
並立書誌 全1件
大学図書館所蔵 件 / 全1件
-
該当する所蔵館はありません
- すべての絞り込み条件を解除する
注記
Includes bibliographical references (p. 329-383) and index
Summary: "Within the criminal justice system one of the most prominent justifications for legal punishment, both historically and currently, is retributivism. The retributive justification of legal punishment maintains that, absent any excusing conditions, wrongdoers are morally responsible for their actions and deserve to be punished in proportion to their wrongdoing. Unlike theories of punishment that aim at deterrence, rehabilitation, or incapacitation, retributivism grounds punishment in the blameworthiness and desert of offenders. It holds that punishing wrongdoers is intrinsically good. For the retributivist, wrongdoers deserve a punitive response proportional to their wrongdoing, even if their punishment serves no further purpose. This means that the retributivist position is not reducible to consequentialist considerations nor in justifying punishment does it appeal to wider goods such as the safety of society or the moral improvement of those being punished"-- Provided by publisher
収録内容
- Free will, legal punishment, and retributivism
- Free will skepticism : hard Incompatibilism and hard luck
- The epistemic argument against retributivism
- Additional reasons for rejecting retributivism
- Consequentialist, educational, and mixed theories of punishment
- Public health-quarantine model I : a non-retributive approach to criminal behavior
- Public health-quarantine model II : the social determinants of health & criminal behavior
- Public health-quarantine model III : human dignity, victims' rights, rehabilitation, and preemptive incapacitation
- Public health-quarantine model IV : punishment, deterrence, evidentiary standards, and indefinite detention
内容説明・目次
内容説明
目次
- Acknowledgments
- 1. Free will, legal punishment, and retributivism
- 2. Free will skepticism: hard incompatibilism and hard luck
- 3. The epistemic argument against retributivism
- 4. Additional reasons for rejecting retributivism
- 5. Consequentialist, educational, and mixed theories of punishment
- 6. Public health-quarantine model I: a non-retributive approach to criminal behavior
- 7. Public health-quarantine model II: the social determinants of health & criminal behavior
- 8. Public health-quarantine model iii: human dignity, victims' rights, rehabilitation, and preemptive incapacitation
- 9. Public health-quarantine model IV: funishment, deterrence, evidentiary standards, and indefinite detention
- References
- Index.
「Nielsen BookData」 より