The Intrinsic Good of Justice

Ratio Juris 32 (2):193-209 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Some retributivists claim that when we punish wrongdoers we achieve a good: justice. The paper argues that the idea of justice, though rhetorically freighted with positive value, contains only a small core of universally-agreed meaning; and its development in a variety of competing conceptions simply recapitulates, without resolving, debates within the theory of punishment. If, to break this deadlock, we stipulate an expressly retributivist conception of justice, then we should concede that punishment which is just (in the stipulated sense) may be morally wrong.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

A plausible theory of retribution.Sidney Gendin - 1970 - Journal of Value Inquiry 5 (1):1-16.
Punishment and Forgiveness.Justin Tosi & Brandon Warmke - 2016 - In Jonathan Jacobs & Jonathan Jackson (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Criminal Justice Ethics. Routledge. pp. 203-216.
A non-utilitarian approach to punishment.H. J. McCloskey - 1965 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 8 (1-4):249 – 263.
Is Kant a retributivist?M. Tunick - 1996 - History of Political Thought 17 (1):60-78.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-01-12

Downloads
313 (#76,449)

6 months
121 (#51,049)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brian Rosebury
University of Central Lancashire

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Punishment and Responsibility.H. L. A. Hart - 1968 - Philosophy 45 (172):162-162.
An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals.David Hume & Tom L. Beauchamp - 1998 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 190 (2):230-231.
Two Treatises of Government.Roland Hall - 1966 - Philosophical Quarterly 16 (65):365.
Contemporary Political Philosophy. An Introduction.Will Kymlicka - 1993 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 55 (1):180-181.

View all 10 references / Add more references