This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
24 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Jami L. Anderson (1999). Annulment Retributivism: A Hegelian Theory of Punishment. Cambridge University Press 5 (4):363-388.
    Despite the bad press that retributivism often receives, the basic assumptions on which this theory of punishment rests are generally regarded as being attractive and compelling. First of these is the assumption that persons are morally responsible agents and that social practices, such as criminal punishment, must acknowledge that fact. Additionally, retributivism is committed to the claim that punishment must be proportionate to the crime, and not determined by such utilitarian concerns as the welfare of society, or the hope of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Andrew Botterell (2013). Review of Douglas Husak, Philosophy of Criminal Law: Selected Essays. [REVIEW] University of Toronto Law Journal 63 (1):152-158.
    A review of Douglas Husak, Philosophy of Criminal Law: Selected Essays (Oxford University Press, 2010).
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Andrew Botterell (2012). Understanding the Voluntary Act Principle. In François Tanguay-Renaud & James Stribopoulos (eds.), Rethinking Criminal Law Theory: New Canadian Perspectives in the Philosophy of Domestic, Transnational, and International Criminal Law. Hart Publishing.
    In broad outline, the chapter proceeds as follows. As indicated above, the Voluntary Act Principle has two components. The first part, the act component, claims that criminal liability can be imposed on an accused only for the performance of an act. The second part, the voluntariness component, claims that criminal liability can be imposed on an accused only for the voluntary performance of an act. I will argue that both components of the Voluntary Act Principle are in need of amendment. (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David Brax & Christian Munthe (2013). Part I: Introduction to the Philosophy of Hate Crime. In The Philosophy of Hate Crime Anthology. University of Gothenburg.
  5. David Brax & Christian Munthe (2013). The Philosophy of Hate Crime Anthology. University of Gothenburg.
    Introductory anthology to the philosophy of hate crime, written in the EU project "When Law and Hate Collide".
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. John Danaher (2013). Kramer's Purgative Rationale for Capital Punishment: A Critique. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-20.
    Matthew Kramer has recently defended a novel justification for the death penalty, something he calls the purgative rationale. According to this rationale, the death penalty can be justifiably implemented if it is necessary in order to purge defilingly evil offenders from a moral community. Kramer claims that this rationale overcomes the problems associated with traditional rationales for the death penalty. Although Kramer is to be commended for carving out a novel niche in a well-worn dialectical space, I argue that his (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Joseph S. Fulda, Restoring Integrity to the Academy: Some Sweeping Suggestions for Wholesale Change.
    Note that this paper is 35 pages, and had been replaced in many places w/ a draft w/o authorization. -/- The academy, broadly construed to include faculty, administrators at all levels, and editors, referees, and publishers of academic work, is beset by more ills bespeaking of a fundamental lack of integrity than can possibly be enumerated in a single monograph; nevertheless, as the need is urgent, and everyone seems to prefer either silence or piecemeal treatments, myself heretofore included, five ills (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Joseph S. Fulda (2013). The Limits of Consent. Sexuality and Culture 17 (4):659-665.
    This journal has frequently taken the position that /consent/, or at least /informed consent/, is all that from a secular viewpoint is necessary for an activity to be ethical. We argue to the contrary, that /consent/ is and /only/ is a /political/ criterion for determining /criminality/—even for a libertarian. Consensual behavior can be /unethical/—although it should not be criminalized—if the consent will never be truly revocable in the future of if such revocability is severely compromised. We give three examples, one (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Joseph S. Fulda (2012). Google Books and Other Internet Mischief. Journal of Information Ethics 21 (2):104-109.
    This article argues for substantial ex–post criminal penalties against purveyors of stolen intellectual property, in lieu of current legislation winding its way through both chambers of the United States Congress. Inter alia, it discusses why such a drastic remedy has proven necessary and what other measures the Congress should consider adopting. It concludes with a sobering discussion of Internet mischief more generally. -/- Note: This is in marked contrast to views expressed in 1999 when civil justice would have sufficed, and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Adam Omar Hosein (2014). Doing, Allowing, and the State. Law and Philosophy 33 (2):235-264.
    The doing/allowing distinction plays an important role in our thinking about a number of legal issues, such as the need for criminal process protections, prohibitions on torture, the permissibility of the death penalty and so on. These are areas where, at least initially, there seem to be distinctions between harms that the state inflicts and harms that it merely allows. In this paper I will argue for the importance of the doing/allowing distinction as applied to state action. Sunstein, Holmes, Vermeule (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Holly Lawford-Smith (2010). Crime and Culpability: A Theory of Criminal Law (by Larry Alexander Et Al.). [REVIEW] Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 35:152-158.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Matthew Lister (2010). Review of May & Hoskins, International Criminal Law and Philosophy. [REVIEW] Concurring Opinions Blog.
    This is a review of an anthology on international criminal law edited by Larry May and Zack Hoskins.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Matthew Lister (2009). Criminal Law Conversations: &Quot;dESERT: EMPIRICAL, NOT METAPHYSICAL" and "CONTRACTUALISM AND THE SHARING OF WRONGS&Quot;. In Paul Robinson, Kimberly Ferzan & Stephen Garvey (eds.), Criminal Law Conversations.
    Following are two short contributions to the book, _Criminal Law Conversations_: commentaries on Paul Robinson's discussion of "Empirical Desert" and Antony Duff & Sandra Marshal's discussion of the sharing of wrongs.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Thomas Nadelhoffer, Stephanos Bibas, Scott Grafton, Kent Kiehl, Andrew Mansfield, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & Michael Gazzaniga (2012). Neuroprediction, Violence, and the Law: Setting the Stage. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 5 (1):67-99.
    In this paper, our goal is to (a) survey some of the legal contexts within which violence risk assessment already plays a prominent role, (b) explore whether developments in neuroscience could potentially be used to improve our ability to predict violence, and (c) discuss whether neuropredictive models of violence create any unique legal or moral problems above and beyond the well worn problems already associated with prediction more generally. In Violence Risk Assessment and the Law , we briefly examine the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. D. Sank & D. Caplan (eds.) (1991). To Be a Victim. Plenum.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Andrew Sepielli (2013). The Law's 'Majestic Equality'. Law and Philosophy 32 (6):673-700.
  17. Katrina Sifferd (forthcoming). What Does It Mean to Be a Mechanism? Morse, Non-Reductivism, and Mental Causation. Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-17.
    Stephen Morse seems to have adopted a controversial position regarding the mind-body relationship: John Searle’s non-reductivism, which claims that conscious mental states are causal yet not reducible to their underlying brain states. Searle’s position has been roundly criticized, with some arguing the theory taken as a whole is incoherent. In this paper I review these criticisms and add my own, concluding that Searle’s position is indeed contradictory, both internally and with regard to Morse's other views. Thus I argue that Morse (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Katrina Sifferd (2008). Nanotechology and the Attribution of Responsibility. Nanotechnology, Law and Business 5 (2):177.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. François Tanguay-Renaud (2013). Criminalizing the State. Criminal Law and Philosophy 7 (2):255-284.
    In this article, I ask whether the state, as opposed to its individual members, can intelligibly and legitimately be criminalized, with a focus on the possibility of its domestic criminalization. I proceed by identifying what I take to be the core objections to such criminalization, and then investigate ways in which they can be challenged. First, I address the claim that the state is not a kind of entity that can intelligibly perpetrate domestic criminal wrongs. I argue against it by (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. François Tanguay-Renaud (2010). The Intelligibility of Extralegal State Action: A General Lesson for Debates on Public Emergencies and Legality. Legal Theory 16 (3):161-189.
    Some legal theorists deny that states can conceivably act extra-legally, in the sense of acting contrary to domestic law. This position finds its most robust articulation in the writings of Hans Kelsen, and has more recently been taken up by David Dyzenhaus in the context of his work on emergencies and legality. This paper seeks to demystify their arguments and, ultimately, contend that we can intelligibly speak of the state as a legal wrongdoer or a legally unauthorized actor.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. François Tanguay-Renaud (2010). Understanding Criminal Law Through the Lens of Reason. Res Publica 16 (1):89-98.
    This is a review essay of Gardner, John. 2007, Offences and Defences: Selected Essays in the Philosophy of Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 288 pp.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. A. M. Viens (2007). Criminal Law in the Regulation of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (2):73-5.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Roger Wertheimer (1991). Preferring Punishment of Criminals Over Provisions for Victims. In D. Sank & D. Caplan (eds.), To Be a Victim. Plenum.
    Victims of crime have long been victimized by our criminal justice system. Why? And why has the movement to rectify this been so late coming?
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Roger Wertheimer (1982). Regulating Police Use of Deadly Force. In N. Bowie & F. Elliston (eds.), Ethics, Public Policy and Criminal Justice. Oelgeschalger, Gunn & Hain. 93--109.
    What should be a police department's policies and regulations on the use of deadly force? What is the relevance for this of the state law on capital punishment?
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation