David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Law and Philosophy 27 (2):123-150 (2008)
Some philosophers think that the challenge of justifying punishment can be met by a theory that emphasizes the expressive character of punishment. A particular type of theories of this sort - call it Expressive Retributivism [ER] - combines retributivist and expressivist considerations. These theories are retributivist since they justify punishment as an intrinsically appropriate response to wrongdoing, as something wrongdoers deserve, but the expressivist element in these theories seeks to correct for the traditional obscurity of retributivism. Retributivists often rely on appeals to controversial intuitions involving obscure concepts. While retributive intuitions can be compelling, some worry that the justificatory challenge cannot be met merely by appealing to them. ER tries to enhance the clarity and justificatory power of these intuitions and the concepts they invoke by appealing to an expressive conception of punishment. I argue that these theories fail to justify punishment and that there is reason to think that they cannot, in principle, justify punishment.
|Keywords||Law Logic Political Science Social Sciences, general Philosophy of Law Law Theory/Law Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Robert Nozick (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Harvard University Press.
Joel Feinberg (1965). The Expressive Function of Punishment. The Monist 49 (3):397-423.
David Dolinko (1991). Some Thoughts About Retributivism. Ethics 101 (3):537-559.
H. L. A. Hart (1964). Law, Liberty, and Morality. Philosophical Review 73 (2):271-274.
Citations of this work BETA
Nathan Hanna (2009). The Passions of Punishment. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (2):232-250.
Jules Holroyd (2010). The Retributive Emotions: Passions and Pains of Punishment. Philosophical Papers 39 (3):343-371.
Nathan Hanna (2009). Liberalism and the General Justifiability of Punishment. Philosophical Studies 145 (3):325-349.
Bill Wringe (2012). Collective Agents and Communicative Theories of Punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (4):436-456.
Nathan Hanna (2014). Facing the Consequences. Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (3):589-604.
Similar books and articles
Jane Johnson (2008). Revisiting Kantian Retributivism to Construct a Justification of Punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (3):291-307.
Thom Brooks (2004). Retributivist Arguments Against Capital Punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (2):188–197.
Larry Alexander (1983). Retributivism and the Inadvertent Punishment of the Innocent. Law and Philosophy 2 (2):233 - 246.
Christopher Ciocchetti (2009). Emotions, Retribution, and Punishment. Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (2):160-173.
Thom Brooks (2005). Kantian Punishment and Retributivism: A Reply to Clark. Ratio 18 (2):237–245.
George Schedler (2011). Retributivism and Fallible Systems of Punishment. Criminal Justice Ethics 30 (3):240-266.
J. Angelo Corlett (2003). Making More Sense of Retributivism: Desert as Responsibility and Proportionality. Philosophy 78 (2):279-287.
Heather J. Gert, Linda Radzik & and Michael Hand (2004). Hampton on the Expressive Power of Punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (1):79–90.
J. Angelo Corlett (2001). Making Sense of Retributivism. Philosophy 76 (1):77-110.
Daniel Z. Korman (2003). The Failure of Trust-Based Retributivism. Law and Philosophy 22 (6):561-575.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads149 ( #25,878 of 1,911,834 )
Recent downloads (6 months)12 ( #50,323 of 1,911,834 )
How can I increase my downloads?