The Science of Punishments

All societies have rules and regulations as well as penalties for those who violate them. There are numerous theories about the philosophy behind these laws and punishments, and the reasons we implement them. A short analysis of two of these perspectives can shed light on the differences between the various ideas while illustrating that, in reality, each theory carries some validity.

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.

Punishment refers to the deliberate or intentional infliction of pain and suffering on an individual for breaching a particular law or code of conduct established in a given society. The idea of punishment has been in existence for a long stretch of time in history with philosophers weighing upon the necessity or otherwise of punishment. Inasmuch as a considerable number of philosophers agree that

There are many different philosophies that are in use in the court systems when determining what sort of punishment will be imposed on someone who is found guilty of committing a crime. These philosophies are in use in both the adult courts and juvenile courts. The juvenile court system is similar to the adult courts, but there are many differences between the two. Both court systems try and keep crime from happening and both courts sentence those found guilty to some sort of punishment through the punishment philosophy that the court determines is a suitable approach for preventing future crime.

It is very difficult to isolate and measure a deterrent effect precisely, because a great many things must happen before deterrence can occur. Three broad classes of extant studies are reviewed; (1) the relationship between objective sanctions, sanction enforcement, and risk perceptions. This research includes calibration studies and correctional studies. (2) The relationship between punishment experiences (personal and vicarious) and change in risk perceptions, in

„X     Punishment & Reinforcement ¡V Parents and teachers use punishment and reward to socialize children into conforming to social norms. Do something that is inappropriate by society¡¦s standards and be punished. Do something correct, and be rewarded.

Introduction Although punishment might have been very harsh in 18th and 19th century, instead of doing away with it, its harshness was just reduced to make it more appropriate over the years. Even in the periods where reformative approaches were very prominent, punishment was still embraced by the penal system. Fox (2013) noted that punishment’s main objective was deterrence. If its harshness and the suffering it caused on offenders could make them fear repeating similar offences, then that was a good thing for the society.

An adult who practices punishment, controls a child externally. This communicates to a child that they are not able to control themselves, thus have no responsibility for their actions. Also, it can create in the child’s mind, the idea that they can commit a behavior so long as they do not get caught or are willing to accept the consequences. Behavior that is modified with punishment does not evolve from the understanding of what is expected in a society, but rather from fear. Since no understanding was obtained this will not

Throughout time, the use of punishment has changed drastically. Not only has the actual infliction of punishment changed, the reasoning behind this punishment has also changed. There have been numerous scholars, educators, and researchers that have presented various theories on the reasoning behind societal punishment. Some of these theories are closely similar, however some are drastically different. It is important to note that these theorists have broad perceptions that can be rooted back to specific time periods throughout history. Societal punishment is defined as, “punishment being a complex social institution, shaped by the ensemble of social and historical forces and having a range of effects that reach well beyond the population of offenders” (Garland, 1991).

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

Punishment has been in existence since the early colonial period and has continued throughout history as a method used to deter criminals from committing criminal acts. Philosophers believe that punishment is a necessity in today’s modern society as it is a worldwide response to crime and violence. Friedrich Nietzche’s book “Punishment and Rehabilitation” reiterates that “punishment makes us into who we are; it creates in us a sense of responsibility and the ability to take and release our social obligations” (Blue, Naden, 2001). Immanuel Kant believes that if an individual commits a crime then punishment should be inflicted upon that individual for the crime committed. Cesare Beccaria, also believes that if there is a breach of the

As school issues such as school refusal (Lock 1986) and ADHD/ADD (Conrad and Bergey 2014) began to be recognised as serious social issues, these socially undesired behaviours became regarded as medical conditions in which require helps from medical experts. Anthropologists provided critical views of contemporary medicine and scientific understanding of human conditions and struggles (Kleinman 1996, Lock 1993 and Rhodes 1996). Conrad and Schneither describe the medicalization of deviance as “deviant behaviours that were once defined as immoral, sinful, or criminal have been given medical meanings. Some say that rehabilitation has replaced punishment, but in many cases medical treatments have become a new form of punishment and social control” (1992, 1). Rhodes points out our attitude toward medicalization as “…the vulnerability of self, body, and society to illness engages us, to a greater or lesser extent depending on context and inclination, in the same problem faced by clinicians: the need to act, to provide useful understanding or in some other way to contribute to the alleviating suffering” (1996, 170). Medical labels for common anxiety among university students, therefore, are associated a concern that those abnormal psychological conditions lead to other social issues in Japanese society. Medicalization of hikikomori and NEET highlight and illustrate the process in which how clinical conceptions expand into everyday life and how Japanese society addresses social

     Punishment is a process that decreases the likelihood of a behavior to occur again. This is not to be confused with negative reinforcement because it doesn't increase the likelihood of an occurrence. There are drawbacks to punishment. It doesn't teach an appropriate behavior to replace an inappropriate one. Also, intense punishment can lead to results such as passivity, fear, anxiety, or hostility. Finally, effects of punishment are sometimes temporary.

To begin with, it is necessary to say that punishment is an integral part of modern countries’ legal systems, because countries have a duty to protect society from wrongdoers and authorities could reach success in it by punishing offenders. Oxford English Dictionary defines punishment as the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence. There are four main purposes of punishment – incapacitation, deterrence, retribution and rehabilitation – and the aim of this paper is to

Theories of why we punish offenders are crucial to the understanding of criminal law; in fact it is not easy to define legal punishment, however one thing is clear within the different theories of punishment is that they all require justification.[1] There are many theories of punishment yet they are predominantly broken down into two main categories. The utilitarian theory seeks to punish offenders to discourage, or “deter,” future wrong doing. The retributive theory seeks to punish offenders because they deserve to be punished due to their behaviour upsetting the balance of society[2].