Two Claims About Desert

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 94 (1):41-56 (2013)
Abstract
Many philosophers claim that it is always intrinsically good when people get what they deserve and that there is always at least some reason to give people what they deserve. I highlight problems with this view and defend an alternative. I have two aims. First, I want to expose a gap in certain desert-based justifications of punishment. Second, I want to show that those of us who have intuitions at odds with these justifications have an alternative account of desert at our disposal – one that may lend our intuitions more credibility
Keywords desert  retributivism
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,365
External links
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

View all 19 references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Gillian Brock (1999). Just Deserts and Needs. Southern Journal of Philosophy 37 (2):165-188.
Stephen Kershnar (2008). Desert Tracks Character Alone. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (1):71-88.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-05-02

Total downloads

40 ( #35,976 of 1,089,100 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #69,982 of 1,089,100 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.