David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Public Affairs Quarterly 23 (4):325-335 (2009)
We “prepunish” a person if we punish her prior to the commission of her crime. This essay discusses our intuitions about the permissibility of prepunishment and the relationship between prepunishment and compatibilism about free will and determinism. It has recently been argued that compatibilism has particular trouble generating a principled objection to prepunishment. The failure to provide such an objection may be a problem for compatibilism if our moral intuitions strongly favor the prohibition of prepunishment. In defense of compatibilism, I argue that while no objection to prepunishment is entailed by the central tenets of compatibilism, this does not necessarily show that compatibilism conflicts with our moral intuitions. And while there may be no distinctly compatibilist objection to prepunishment, there are common-sense objections to prepunishment of which the compatibilist can make use, at least under actual-world circumstances. And, while these common-sense objections might be inoperative in certain non-actual circumstances, it is not clear that support for prepunishment would be unintuitive in these circumstances.
|Keywords||Prepunishment Moral Responsibility Compatibilism Saul Smilansky|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Saul Smilansky (2008). Prepunishment for Compatibilists: A Reply to Kearns. Analysis 68 (299):254–257.
Michael Robinson (2010). A Compatibilist-Friendly Rejection of Prepunishment. Philosophia 38 (3):589-594.
Saul Smilansky (2007). Determinism and Prepunishment: The Radical Nature of Compatibilism. Analysis 67 (296):347–349.
Stephen Kearns (2008). Compatibilism Can Resist Prepunishment: A Reply to Smilansky. Analysis 68 (299):250–253.
Saul Smilansky (2008). More Prepunishment for Compatibilists: A Reply to Beebee. Analysis 68 (299):260–263.
Saul Smilansky (2003). Compatibilism: The Argument From Shallowness. Philosophical Studies 115 (3):257-82.
Saul Smilansky (1991). The Contrariety of Compatibilist Positions. Journal of Philosophical Research 16:293-309.
Michael S. McKenna (1998). Moral Theory and Modified Compatibilism. Journal of Philosophical Research 23 (January):441-458.
Benjamin Bayer (2015). The Elusiveness of Doxastic Compatibilism. American Philosophical Quarterly 52 (3):233-252.
Andrew C. Khoury (2014). Manipulation and Mitigation. Philosophical Studies 168 (1):283-294.
Jeremy Randel Koons (2002). Is Hard Determinism a Form of Compatibilism? Philosophical Forum 33 (1):81-99.
Roy Sorensen (2006). Future Law: Prepunishment and the Causal Theory of Verdicts. Noûs 40 (1):166–183.
Stefaan E. Cuypers (2013). Moral Shallowness, Metaphysical Megalomania, and Compatibilist-Fatalism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (1):173-188.
Richard Arneson (2007). The Smart Theory of Moral Responsibility and Desert. In Serena Olsaretti (ed.), Desert and Justice. Clarendon Press
Neil Levy (2009). Luck and History-Sensitive Compatibilism. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (235):237-251.
Added to index2012-03-11
Total downloads17 ( #217,180 of 1,907,626 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #273,183 of 1,907,626 )
How can I increase my downloads?