Consequentialism And Retributivism

536 Words2 Pages

Consequentialism is a punishment theory that provides moral justification for punishment by taking into account future consequences and by weighing the intrinsic value of a punishment against other available alternatives. The primary rationale for punishment is to bring the most good over harm, to deter or prevent crimes from occurring in the first place and to prevent future crimes from being committed. Utilitarianism would even consider punishing the innocent or pass a more severe sentence for a lesser crime if it could be determined that benefits to society outweighed the consequences of such punishment (Howard). For example, if it were believed that better crime deterrence or prevention could be achieved, a consequentialist would consider executing a murderer versus handing down a life sentence. Retributivism is a punishment theory that looks back at the specific nature of a crime and determines how much the victim suffered, in order to morally justify the severity of punishment. The moral emphasis is on righting a wrong and seeking justice by ensuring that criminals get what the...

Show More
Related

  • Reasons In Igor Primoratz's Justifying Legal Punishment?

    1355 Words  | 3 Pages

    Igor Primoratz defends the retributivist idea that a punishment is justified only if it gives a criminal his just deserts. But what do criminals deserve? Primoratz argues for the following principle: criminals deserve to be deprived of the same value that they deprived their victims of. Primoratz regards all human beings as possessed of lives of equal moral worth, and believes that the human life is the most valuable thing. He thinks that murders deserve to die. Since justice is a matter of giving people what they deserve, it follows that justice demands for murderers to be executed.

    Read More

  • Death Penalty: Deontological And Teleological Arguments

    238 Words  | 1 Pages

    The death penalty in American society using the deontological and teleological argument is in the deontological perspective, believes that the death penalty is a morally appropriate punishment and also views capital punishment as being immoral. In deontological argument, it will place moral emphasis on the intentions of his or her actions. The deontological ethics does not focus on the actual consequences. A deontological defense of punishment is likely to be a retributive justification. According to Kant, he believes in the retributive punishment, which is known as the idea of “an eye for an eye”, meaning the law says that we should punish someone not because what they did was wrong, but to just punish them for the sake of punishing.

    Read More

  • Consequentialism In Training Day

    908 Words  | 2 Pages

    Consequentialism is a term used by the philosophers to simplify what is right and what is wrong. Consequentialist ethical theory suggests that right and wrong are the consequences of our actions. It is only the consequences that determine whether our actions are right or wrong. Standard consequentialism is a form of consequentialism that is discussed the most. It states that “the morally right action for an agent to perform is the one that has the best consequences or that results in the most good.” It means that an action is morally correct if it has little to no negative consequences, or the one that has the most positive results.

    Read More

  • Herbert Morris's Theory Of Punishment

    1614 Words  | 4 Pages

    Herbert Morris and Jean Hampton both view punishment as important to a healthy society. However, their views on what kind of role does punishment plays in a healthy society are vastly different. Morris believes that when one commits a crime they “owe a debt to the society and the person they wronged” and, therefore the punishment of that person is retributive, and a right for those who committed this wrong (270). Hampton, on the other hand, believes that punishment is a good for those who have strayed in the path of being morally right. Out of the two views presented, I believe that Hampton view is more plausible, and rightly places punishment as a constructive good that is better suited for society than Morris’s view.

    Read More

  • Federal And State Court System Case Study

    702 Words  | 2 Pages

    Deterrence punishment is a threat to deter people from offending. Deterrence is often contrasted with retributivism, which holds that punishment is a necessary consequence of a crime and should be calculated based on the gravity of the wrong done.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism, Kant's Moral Theory, And Virtue Ethics

    1007 Words  | 3 Pages

    The first moral theory studied in the course this semester was classical utilitarianism. Utilitarianism at its base argument is the attempt to maximize utility. When a person uses the moral theory of utilitarianism, they are looking at that action that benefits the most people or that has the higher good for the most people. Utilitarianism say that a person does a certain action that helps or benefits a higher number of people then that action is moral good. Before discussing Utilitarianism further, there is a need to explain what it has to do with consequentialism. Consequentialism is when a person looks at actions or something that someone does and judges that action based of the criteria that of consequences that action brings. To a consequentialist the only way for an action to be moral good the action itself and what the outcome it brings must be good. Let’s say that person is talking a final on Tuesday and decides to bring a bag of candy to the whole class during their final to have something to keep them up. If this action was to benefit the whole class and that action brings good consequence than that action is morally right to a consequ...

    Read More

  • Consequentialism, Deontology, and Inevitable Trade-offs

    3000 Words  | 6 Pages

    ABSTRACT: Recently, unrestrained consequentialism has been defended against the charge that it leads to unacceptable trade-offs by showing a trade-off accepted by many of us is not justified by any of the usual nonconsequenlist arguments. The particular trade-off involves raising the speed limit on the Interstate Highway System. As a society, we seemingly accept a trade-off of lives for convenience. This defense of consequentialism may be a tu quoque, but it does challenge nonconsequentialists to adequately justify a multitude of social decisions. Work by the deontologist Frances Kamm, conjoined with a perspective deployed by several economists on the relation between social costs and lives lost, is relevant. It provides a starting point by justifying decisions which involve trading lives only for other lives. But the perspective also recognizes that using resources in excess of some figure (perhaps as low as $7.5 million) to save a life causes us to forego other live-saving activities, thus causing a net loss of life. Setting a speed limit as low as 35 miles per hour might indeed save some lives, but the loss of productivity due to the increased time spent in travel would cost an even greater number of lives. Therefore, many trade-offs do not simply involve trading lives for some lesser value (e.g., convenience), but are justified as allowing some to die in order to save a greater number.

    Read More

  • Goals Of Criminal Sentencing: Affect The Decisions Of Restorative Justice

    1087 Words  | 3 Pages

    The first of the five goals of sentencing is retribution. This goal is pretty cut and dry because it states that “we are justified in punishing because and only because offenders deserve it” (Moore 1992: 188). Those who do the crime must ultimately do the time. This punishment should be appropriate to the type and severity of the crime committed. Retributivists look at the

    Read More

  • Ethical Theory Of Memory Essay

    511 Words  | 2 Pages

    On considering the consequentialist theory we need to evaluate the consequences of the situation and action is needed to be taken which seems to be apt. To some extent we Conseqentialist theory works to argue but Deontologist theory works even more better in this situation

    Read More

  • A Defense Of Retributivism Essay

    1823 Words  | 4 Pages

    With the field of philosophy, the concept of "desert" suggests the status of deserving a particular response based upon prior action. The term is often invoked within conversations dealing with blame and justice. However, philosophers disagree on whether desert justifies responsive behaviors such as punishment or revenge. This debate is particularly significantly within the context of a legal system that purports to punish criminals in a manner that is consistent with their crimes.

    Read More

  • Retributive Theory Of Punishment Essay

    696 Words  | 2 Pages

    Consequentialists argue that punishing someone for their wrongdoings will ensure that they are less likely to commit this act again, but

    Read More

  • Essay On Capital Punishment

    822 Words  | 2 Pages

    Defenders of capital punishment can be separated into two categories. Some are retributivists and follow Immanuel Kant’s theory of retribution. Other defenders are consequentialist and follow John Stewart Mill’s consequentialist approach. Both philosophers unambiguously address the dispute of capital punishment as a moral responsibility in their ethical theories...

    Read More

  • Justification of Punishment!

    2840 Words  | 6 Pages

    Regarding the justification of punishment philosophers are not of the same opinion. According to the utilitarian moral thinkers punishment can be justified solely by its consequences. That is to say, according to the utilitarian account of punishment 'A ought to be punished' means that A has done an act harmful to people and it needs to be prevented by punishment or the threat of it. So, it will be useful to punish A. Deontologists like Mabbott, Ewing and Hawkins, on the other hand, believe that punishment is justifiable purely on retributive grounds. That is to say, according to them, only the past fact that a man has committed a crime is sufficient enough to justify the punishment inflicted on him. But D.D. Raphael is found to reconcile between the two opposite views. According to him, a punishment is justified when it is both useful and deserved.

    Read More

  • Consequentialism: An Ethical Theory

    833 Words  | 2 Pages

    Consequentialism is an ethical theory that evaluates the consequences of a person’s action to determine if their actions are right or wrong (Slote 34). According to the theory, a morally right act is one that has more good outcomes than bad ones. In this ethical theory, the end justifies the means; hence, it argues that people should first determine the good and bad consequences of actions before they do them. After determining the total outcomes, it is important to investigate whether the total good consequences are more. If the good ones outweigh the bad ones, then that action is morally right, but if it is the reverse, then the action is morally wrong.

    Read More

  • Classical School Of Criminology Essay

    1422 Words  | 3 Pages

    It also advocated for the abolition of the death penalty. Discretion used by judges was unlimited, which saw extremely inconsistent and harsh penalties applied to offenders, with disadvantaged offenders being given much harsher penalties than those offenders with a higher social status (Monachesi, 1955). The Classical School of Criminology worked off four main principles: firstly, that individuals act according to their rationality and their own free will, secondly, individuals will weigh up the benefits of committing the crime and compare the benefits to the consequences if they are caught, thirdly, the severity of the punishment must be tied closely with the severity of the crime to act as a deterrent to others and finally, the punishment must be carried out swiftly in an attempt to deter and reduce further crime (Jenkins,

    Read More

More about Consequentialism And Retributivism

Open Document