Law and Philosophy 29 (3):337-369 (2010)
|Abstract||The fact that human fallibility virtually ensures that punishment will sometimes befall the innocent presents a theoretical puzzle to all forms of retributivism. Retributivists usually say that desert is a necessary condition for justified punishment. It remains unclear, following this view, how retributivists can support punishment in (imperfect) practice. The paper investigates a number of possible replies available to the retributivist. It concludes that one reply in particular can overcome the problem posed by fallibility, but it is not obvious that this reply is convincing.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Joachim Widder (1998). The Fallibility of Medical Judgment as a Consequence of the Inexactness of Observations. Medicine, Healthcare and Philosophy 1 (2):119-124.
Larry Alexander (1983). Retributivism and the Inadvertent Punishment of the Innocent. Law and Philosophy 2 (2):233 - 246.
Eugene O. Mills (2002). Fallibility and the Phenomenal Sorites. Noûs 36 (3):384-407.
Thom Brooks (2005). Kantian Punishment and Retributivism: A Reply to Clark. Ratio 18 (2):237–245.
Michael Clark (2006). Retribution and Organic Unities. Journal of Moral Philosophy 3 (3):351-358.
Benjamin Vilhauer (2013). Persons, Punishment, and Free Will Skepticism. Philosophical Studies 162 (2):143-163.
Thom Brooks (2003). Kant's Theory of Punishment. Utilitas 15 (02):206-.
George Schedler (2011). Retributivism and Fallible Systems of Punishment. Criminal Justice Ethics 30 (3):240-266.
J. Angelo Corlett (2001). Making Sense of Retributivism. Philosophy 76 (1):77-110.
Thom Brooks (2004). Retributivist Arguments Against Capital Punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (2):188–197.
Added to index2010-03-31
Total downloads34 ( #40,539 of 722,834 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,834 )
How can I increase my downloads?