Social Philosophy and Policy 7 (2):194-208 (1990)

Abstract
One dark and rainy night, Yuso sexually assaults and tortures Zelan. In escaping from the scene of his crime, he falls heavily and becomes an impotent paraplegic. Instead of treating his fate as divine retribution for his wicked acts, Yuso sees it as sheer bad luck. He shows no remorse for what he has done, and vainly hopes that he will recover his powers, which he now treats as involuntarily hoarded resources to be used on less rainy days. In the presence of others, he pretends that he has turned over a new leaf. He asks for religious and educational books, hoping to make up for his poor education and deprived social background. But he immediately discards them when he is alone in favor of the pornographic magazines which he has bribed a nurse to smuggle in for him. His deception and various obscene acts committed in the hospital are exposed; by the time he comes up for trial, everyone knows that he is still a lustful, sadistic, and unrepentant man. Most retributivists have a sufficient justification for punishing Yuso independently of the social consequences of his punishment. Two features of the case might cause some difficulties. First, Yuso has already experienced considerable suffering and deprivation both before and after his crime, and retributivists might disagree about the relevance of the suffering to his punishment. Secondly, Yuso is unrepentant, and it is unlikely that punishment will change him. This might, as we shall see, create a problem for those who think that the justifying aim of punishment is the moral reform of the offender.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0265052500000820
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,811
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Punishment and Responsibility.H. L. A. Hart - 1968 - Philosophy 45 (172):162-162.
Trials and Punishments.John Cottingham & R. A. Duff - 1987 - Philosophical Quarterly 37 (149):448.
Desert.Jeffrie G. Murphy & George Sher - 1990 - Philosophical Review 99 (2):280.
The Justification of General Deterrence.Daniel M. Farrell - 1985 - Philosophical Review 94 (3):367-394.
Do the Guilty Deserve Punishment?Richard W. Burgh - 1982 - Journal of Philosophy 79 (4):193-210.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Retributivism and Resources.Jesper Ryberg - 2013 - Utilitas 25 (1):66-79.
Communication, Expression, and the Justification of Punishment.Andy Engen - 2014 - Athens Journal of Humanities and Arts 1 (4):299-307.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Retributivism Revisited.Nathan Hanna - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 167 (2):473-484.
Annulment Retributivism: A Hegelian Theory of Punishment.Jami L. Anderson - 1999 - Cambridge University Press 5 (4):363-388.
A Hegelian Theory of Punishment.Jami L. Anderson - 1999 - Legal Theory 5 (4):363-388.
Retributivism and Resources.Jesper Ryberg - 2013 - Utilitas 25 (1):66-79.
Retributive Parsimony.Richard L. Lippke - 2009 - Res Publica 15 (4):377-395.
Retributivist Arguments Against Capital Punishment.Thom Brooks - 2004 - Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (2):188–197.
Retribution and Organic Unities.Michael Clark - 2006 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 3 (3):351-358.
Kant's Theory of Punishment.Thom Brooks - 2003 - Utilitas 15 (2):206.
Annulling Crimes: A Hegelian Theory of Retribution.Jami Lynn Anderson - 1995 - Dissertation, University of Southern California
Reciprocity as a Justification for Retributivism.Jami L. Anderson - 1997 - Criminal Justice Ethics 16 (1):13-25.
Time and Retribution.Patrick Tomlin - 2014 - Law and Philosophy 33 (5):655-682.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-08-31

Total views
86 ( #129,030 of 2,463,140 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #179,109 of 2,463,140 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes