The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection


Authors
Miroslav Imbrisevic
Heythrop College
Abstract
Recently, David Boonin has put forward several objections to Carlos S. Nino's 'Consensual Theory of Punishment'. In this paper I will defend Nino against the 'explicit denial objection'. I will discuss whether Boonin's interpretation of Nino as a tacit consent theorist is right. I will argue that the offender's consent is neither tacit nor express, but a special category of implicit consent. Further, for Nino the legal-normative consequences of an act (of crime) are 'irrevocable', i.e. one cannot (expressly and successfully) deny liability to them. I will suggest an explanation for Nino's irrevocability claim
Keywords Carlos Nino  Punishment  Consent  Boonin  Explicit denial  Tacit consent
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0495-4548
DOI theoria201025223
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
How to Do Things with Words.[author unknown] - 1962 - Mind 75 (298):262-285.
The Problem of Punishment.David Boonin - 2008 - Cambridge University Press.
Moral Principles and Political Obligations.Diana T. Meyers - 1981 - Philosophical Review 90 (3):472.
The Ethics of Human Rights.Carlos Santiago Nino - 1991 - Oxford University Press.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-01-09

Total views
152 ( #53,813 of 2,286,302 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
17 ( #50,070 of 2,286,302 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature