Document Preview:
Name: Professor: Institution: Date: Justification for Punishment Punishment refers to the intentional infliction of pain on an individual convicted of a crime like a moral transgression or a legal wrong. Punishment encompasses causing pain or denial of a right similar to the one the perpetrator of an offense causes on his or her victim. Overall punishment needs to be politically and legally justified (Sociedad Filosófica Ibero Americana 319). In as much as a number of philosophers acknowledge that punishment is justified at times they give diverse opinions on the manner in which it needs to be justified and what pain infliction is meant to safeguard- personal autonomy personal property rights or a democratic process just to mention a few. This paper delves into advancing the claim that punishment is justified by drawing ideas of Gertrude Ezorsky and H.L.A Hart. The justifications for punishment fall into three broad categories. The check by the doctrines of justice (Ezorsky xi). As can be observed from the above arguments the justification for punishment is an inherent issue that has been discussed for a long time now. Particularly the proponents are of the view that various alternative methods some of which may be non-punitive that may be used in social control have been examined and rejected as they are ineffective interventions. Therefore the only method that can suffice or simply work into ensuring that laws are adhered is using the punitive means. The justification for punishment cannot be any way better captured except by alluding to Hart’s assertion that punishment is the best communication enterprise to the offenders. Works Cited Ezorsky G. Philosophical Perspectives on Punishment Second Edition SUNY Press 2015 Louis K. and Steven S. Fairness versus Welfare Harvard University Press 2009 Sociedad Filosófica Ibero Americana. Legal and Political Philosophy Rodopi 2012 [...]
Order Description:
Question: What is the justification for punishment? Explain how a utilitarian, a retributivist, and a teleological retributivist might each answer this question ? Note: you should draw on at least three ideas from Ezorsky to Hart Writing instruction : Philosophy paper should be an argument in defense of some claim. This claim is your thesis. Thesis and arguments are very important. Writing should be very clear and argumentative please and it should be very narrowly-focused point Always cite. And careful about plagiarism. Everything above the first line of your paper does not count towards the 2-3 page minimun
Subject Area: Philosophy
Document Type: Paraphrasing
