The Argument Of Punishment : Ethical Perspectives

Provide the justifications for punishment in modern society. Punishment functions as a form of social control and is geared towards “imposing some unwanted burden such as fines, probations, imprisonment, or even death” on a convicted person in return for the crimes they committed (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2013, p.6). There are four main justifications for punishment and they are: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. There is also said to be a fifth justification of reintegration as well.

The concept of punishment exists in many different forms, each with conflicting views on how to best approach an offence committed by individuals. Two theories stand at the forefront of punishment being that of the Utilitarian, and Retributive theories. Each theory presents its own idea on how punishment ought to be carried out and the core reasoning behind it. The two theories are also debated within our own Canadian legal system which is referred to as: The Criminal Code of Canada, where it details the different principles and procedures when sentencing an individual who has committed a specific offence with guidelines for what sanction should be given. Such principles/procedures reflect various factors within the two theories, and have undergone different fluctuations for which theory has dominated throughout history, but have been influenced more by one theory than from the other. Generally speaking, punishment is invoked upon offenders for the pursuit of the common good of mankind for a society that prospers, and not one that is hindered. Two primary theorists each lead one of the theories of punishment and what its purpose is; one who stands from a Utilitarian view is Jeremy Bentham, and the other being Immanuel Kant who focuses on a more Retributive theory of punishment.

The word punishment defines as the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offense in the criminal justice system. When punishing an offender I believe is for many different purpose that will be for the better. About five different punishment imprisonment, fines, probation, intermediate sanctions and death. There are many different type of purpose start first with retribution, which offenders should receive the punishment that they deserve based on the seriousness of their criminal acts. Follow by the deterrence, the theory of imposing the discouragement to future offenders and as well using it as an example to deter others from violating the law. Then it is incapacitation which, used to keep offender away from society to

Punishment is defined as “the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offense” (“Punishment”). Some prominent theories of punishment include retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and the moral education theory. Although retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation are all crucial components of punishment justification, independently the theories have weaknesses that avert the moral rationalization of punishment. I believe that Jean Hampton’s moral education theory is the best justification for punishment because it yields the most sympathetic and prudent reasons for punishment, while simultaneously showing that punishment cannot be justified by solely

The salient characteristics of the two theories of punishment, which find expression in English law, will be found below [1]. In the absence of any definitive public policy an unresolved tension exists, which derives from attempts made to reconcile the two theories,

The philosophical orientation toward punishment that one favors often is derived from how one perceives crime and the criminal, and what it is that one hopes to achieve by punishing someone. Various aims for punishment have been pursued: retribution, deterrence, reform, rehabilitation, and reintegration among

The need for punishment has always been necessary in our world. In the modern justice system, offenders are judged and punishment by the government and not those whom the offended. While this approach has taken punishment out of the hand of those whom have been offended, it is still at its center a type retribution. The theory of retribution states at its core that criminals deserve to suffer and prisons should make sure that they suffer for their crimes. The approach does have some good points. First, this approach focuses on the punishment being equal in

Emile Durkheim’s sociological perspective of punishment is based on the notion of morality. In his approach to the sociology of punishment, key themes are defined when indicating what punishment is used for in society. The first theme to consider is crime itself. Durkheim defines crime as normal and necessary rather than a pathological presence in society (Fenton, 1984:186).

Utilitarianism is an approach to punishment, founded by Jeremy Bentham and it’s the idea that the morality of an individual’s (good) actions is benefited by a great number, that it affects the overall happiness. There are four philosophies that are operated for prison systems and these are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

The well-researched, clear and comprehensive discussion of the history of discipline and punishment, coupled with the expansive philosophical questioning and criticism of the past systems used to punish, provides readers with an in-depth understanding of the history of discipline and punishment and generates support of Foucault’s suggestions regarding effective

Punishment can be dated back to the time of early human civilization. It took a while for human civilization to begin imposing certain laws and regulations that would subsequent an act of crime. During the early time period of 2000 B.C. to 1800 A.D. (2010), ancient Babylonian and Sumerian codes began the model of creating a practice where criminals would be punished for their wrong doings. One of the earliest philosophies of this ancient time was the term Lex talionis or an eye for an eye. This practice is based on the criminal punishment idea of retribution, which means that a criminal deserves to be punished based on the crime committed. As time progressed, new ways of thinking emerged and eventually crime had to be the responsibility of the government because they believed that a crime committed against one citizen was considered to be committed against the whole society. During the enlightenment, great philosophers such as Cesare Beccaria, Jeremy Bentham, and John Howard changed the perspective on human life. Prior the enlightenment, people were not rational and they believed that behavior was not a function of their choice. That’s why they highly supported punishment for retribution. However, during post-enlightenment the main purpose of punishment became to deter or stop crime. In hopes of getting criminals of the street, new ways of punishing evolved but mainly it gave development to incarceration.

Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, had some interesting views in regards to punishment. He had three theses regarding the justification of punishment "1. Only the guilty may be

Under what circumstances do we, as human beings, find justification in the punishment of others? What is the best way to go about handling situations in which a punishment is deemed necessary? Who had the authority to deem it necessary in the first place? Clearly, none of these are easy questions to answer, and it may seem that there is no correct answer. Indeed, these questions have been answered before by multiple famous philosophers, and their answers are what we will be looking at and analyzing today. Specifically, we will look at how Jeffrie Murphy explains why a retributivist way of thinking is superior, but also the non-practical implications of thinking this way from a Marxist viewpoint.

Quoting from the Merriam Webster dictionary, it defines punishment as suffering, pain or loss that serves as a retribution, or

With all wrongdoing there must be a penalty for the consequences which forms the basis of the term of ‘punishment’.28 Human societies have been heavily characterized for having the view that wrongdoers should suffer a more or less immediate punishment for their bad deeds, therefore the more serious the offense, the more extreme the punishment.28