Advertisement

The Journal of Ethics

, 13:73 | Cite as

Punishment Theory’s Golden Half Century: A Survey of Developments from (about) 1957 to 2007

  • Michael Davis
Article

Abstract

This paper describes developments in punishment theory since the middle of the twentieth century. After the mid–1960s, what Stanley I. Benn called “preventive theories of punishment”—whether strictly utilitarian or more loosely consequentialist like his—entered a long and steep decline, beginning with the virtual disappearance of reform theory in the 1970s. Crowding out preventive theories were various alternatives generally (but, as I shall argue, misleadingly) categorized as “retributive”. These alternatives include both old theories (such as the education theory) resurrected after many decades in philosophy’s graveyard and some new ones (such as the fairness theory). Only in the last decade or so have new vares o “consequentialism” appeared to dilute a debate among philosophers that had become almost entirely about “retributivism”. I shall describe this trend in more detail. The description will be less an update of my 1990 survey than a rethinking of it. The conclusion I draw from this rethinking is that we need to drop the utilitarian–retributivist (and nonconsequentialist–nonconsequentialist) distinction in favor of one sorting punishment theories according to whether they rely in part on empirical considerations (externalist theories) or instead rely (almost) entirely on conceptual relations (internalist theories).

Keywords

Retributive Utilitarian Consequentialist Nonconsequentialist Conceptual Empirical Kant 

Notes

Acknowledgments

An early version of this paper was presented to the Humanities Colloquium, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, on February 8, 2008. I should like to thanks those present—as well as Angelo Corlett, Brian Ellis, Steve Kershnar, and Don Scheid—for their helpful comments.

References

  1. Alexander, Larry. 1991. Self-defense, punishment, and proportionality. Law and Philosophy: An International Journal for Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy 10 (August): 323–328.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong, K.G. 1961. The retributivist hits back. Mind 70 (October): 471–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnes, J. 1990. Models and interpretations. Avon, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, Randy E. 1977. Restitution: A new paradigm of criminal justice. Ethics 87 (July): 287–301.Google Scholar
  5. Barton, C.K.B. 1999. Getting even: Revenge as a form of justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Benn, Stanley I. 1958. An approach to the problems of punishment. Philosophy 33 (October): 325–334.Google Scholar
  7. Bennett, Christopher. 2006. Taking the sincerity out of saying sorry: Restorative justice as ritual. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (May): 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benson, B.L. 1998. To serve and protect: Privatization and community in criminal justice. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brooks, Thom. 2003. Kant’s theory of punishment. Utilitas: A Journal of Utilitarian Studies 15 (July): 206–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cain, James. 2002. On the problem of hell. Religious Studies 38 (September): 355–362.Google Scholar
  11. Cederblom, J. 1995. The retributive liability theory of punishment. Public Affairs Quarterly 25 (October): 305–315.Google Scholar
  12. Corlett, J. Angelo. 2006. Responsibility and punishment, 3d ed. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Cottingham, John. 1979. Varieties of retribution. Philosophical Quarterly 29 (July): 236–246.Google Scholar
  14. Dagger, Richard. 1993. Playing fair with punishment. Ethics 103 (April): 473–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, L.H. 1972. They deserve to suffer. Analysis 32 (March): 136–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis, Michael. 1983. How to make the punishment fit the crime. Ethics 93 (July): 726-752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis, Michael. 1988. The relative independence of punishment theory. Law and Philosophy 7 (December): 321-350.Google Scholar
  18. Davis, Michael. 1990. Recent work in punishment theory. Public Affairs Quarterly 4 (July): 217-232.Google Scholar
  19. Davis, Michael. 1991. Punishment as language: misleading analogy for desert theorists. Law and Philosophy 10 (April): 310–322.Google Scholar
  20. Davis, Michael. 1997. Review—Phillip Montague, punishment as societal defense. Ethics 107 (April): 532–534.Google Scholar
  21. Dolinko, David. 1991. Some thoughts about retributivism. Ethics 101 (April): 537–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dolinko, David. 1994. Mismeasuring ‘unfair advantage’: A response to Michael Davis. Law and Philosophy 13 (November): 493–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Duff, R.A. 1986. Trials and punishments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Dzur, Albert W., and Alan Wertheimer. 2002. Forgiveness and public deliberation: The practice of restorative justice. Criminal Justice Ethics 21 (Winter-Spring): 3–20.Google Scholar
  25. Edwards, Paul, ed. 1967. The encyclopedia of philosophy, vol. 7. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  26. Ellis, Anthony. 1997. Punishment and the principle of fair play. Utilitas: A Journal of Utilitarian Studies 9 (March): 82–97.Google Scholar
  27. Ellis, Anthony. 2005. A deterrence theory of punishment. In Philosophy and its public role: Essays in ethics, politics, society and culture, ed. William Aiken, John Haldane, 210–226. Exeter, UK: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
  28. Farrell, Daniel M. 2004. Capital punishment and societal self-defence. In Philosophy and its public role: Essays in ethics, politics, society and culture, ed. William Aiken, 241–256. Exeter, UK: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
  29. Feinberg, Joel. 1965. The expressive function of punishment. Monist 49 (July): 397–423.Google Scholar
  30. Finis, John. 1972. The restoration of retribution. Analysis 32 (March): 131–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Flew, A.G.N. 1954. The justification of punishment. Philosophy 29 (October): 291–307.Google Scholar
  32. Gahringer, Robert E. 1960. Punishment as language. Ethics 71 (October): 46–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gavrielides, Theo. 2005. Some meta-theoretical questions for restorative justice. Ratio Juris: An International Journal of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law 18 (March), 84–106.Google Scholar
  34. Gewirth, Alan. 1978. Reason and morality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Goldman, Alan. 1979. The paradox of punishment. Philosophy & Public Affairs 9 (Fall): 42–58.Google Scholar
  36. Hampton, Jean. 1984. The moral education theory of punishment. Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (Summer): 208–238.Google Scholar
  37. Hampton, Jean. 1992. Correcting harms versus righting wrongs: The goal of retribution. UCLA Law Review 39 (August): 1659–1702.Google Scholar
  38. Hart, H.L.A. 1960. Prolegomenon to the principles of punishment. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 60: 1–26.Google Scholar
  39. Hegel, G.W.F. 2008. The philosophy of right. www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/prindex.htm.
  40. Hill, Thomas. 1999. Kant on wrongdoing, desert, and punishment. Law and Philosophy 18 (July): 407–441.Google Scholar
  41. Hoekema, David. 1980. The right to punish and the right to be punished. In John Rawls’ theory of social justice: An introduction, ed. H.G. Blocker, and E.H. Smith, 239–269. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Husak, Douglas. 1992. Why punish the deserving?. Nous 26 (December): 447–464.Google Scholar
  43. Kabay, Paul. 2005. Is the status principle beyond salvation? Toward redeeming an unpopular theory of hell. Sophia 44(May): 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kant, Immanuel. 1999. Metaphysical elements of justice, 2d ed. (trans and ed: Ladd, John). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
  45. Kleinig, John. 1973. Punishment and desert. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  46. Martinson, Robert. 1978–1979. New findings, new views: A note of caution regarding sentencing reform. Hofstra Law Review 7: 243–258.Google Scholar
  47. McCloskey, H.J. 1962. The complexity of the concept of punishment. Philosophy 37 (October): 307–325.Google Scholar
  48. McDermott, Daniel. 2001. The permissibility of punishment. Law and Philosophy 20 (July): 403–432.Google Scholar
  49. McPherson, Thomas. 1967. Punishment: Definition and justification. Analysis 28 (October): 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Merle, Jean-Christophe. 2000. A Kantian critique of Kant’s theory of punishment. Law and Philosophy: An International Journal for Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy 19 (May): 311–338.Google Scholar
  51. Metz, Thaddeus. 2000. Censure theory and intuitions about punishment. Law and Philosophy 19 (July): 491–512.Google Scholar
  52. Montague, Phillip. 1995. Punishment as societal defense. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  53. Moore, Kathleen. 1989. Pardons. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Moore, Michael S. 1993. Justifying retributivism. Israel Law Review 27 (Winter-Spring): 15–49.Google Scholar
  55. Morris, Herbert. 1968. Persons and punishment. The Monist 52 (October): 475–501.Google Scholar
  56. Morris, Herbert. 1981. A paternalistic theory of punishment. American Philosophical Quarterly 18 (October): 263–271.Google Scholar
  57. Morris, Christopher W. 1991. Punishment and the loss of moral standing. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (March): 53–79.Google Scholar
  58. Murphy, Jeffrie G. 1971a. Three mistakes about retributivism. Analysis 31 (April): 166–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Murphy, Jeffrie G. 1971b. Kant’s theory of criminal punishment. In Proceedings of the third international Kant congress, ed. L.W. Beck, 434–441. Dordrect: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  60. Murphy, Jeffrie G. 1973. Marxism and retribution. Philosophy and Public Affairs 2 (Spring): 217–243.Google Scholar
  61. Murphy, Jeffrie G. 1987. Does Kant have a theory of punishment. Columbia Law Review 87 (April): 509–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nozick, Robert. 1981. Philosophical explanations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Obold-Eshleman, Christa. 2004. Victims’ rights and the danger of domestication of the restorative justice paradigm. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public Policy 18 (2): 571–603.Google Scholar
  64. Philips, Michael. 1985. The justification of punishment and the justification of political authority. Law and Philosophy 5 (December): 393–416.Google Scholar
  65. Primoratz, Igor. 1989. Punishment as language. Philosophy 64 (April): 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Quinton, A.M. 1954. On punishment. Analysis 14 (June): 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rawls, John. 1955. Two concepts of rules. Philosophical Review 64 (January): 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Reiff, Mark R. 2005. Punishment, compensation, and law: A theory of enforceability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Sadurski, Wojciech. 1985. Giving desert its due. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  70. Schafer-Landau, Russ. 1991. Can punishment morally educate?. Law and Philosophy 10 (May): 189–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schafer-Landau, Russ. 1996. The failure of retributivism. Philosophical Studies 82 (July): 289–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Scheid, Don E. 1983. Kant’s retributivism. Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy 93 (January): 262–282.Google Scholar
  73. Scheid, Don E. 1997. Constructing a theory of punishment, desert, and distribution of penalties. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 10 (July): 441–506.Google Scholar
  74. Scher, George. 1987. Desert. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Simmons, A. John. 1992. The Lockean theory of rights. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Skillen, J. 1980. How to say things with walls. Philosophy 55 (October): 509–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stephen, J.F. 1890. A history of the criminal law of England. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  78. Tunick, Mark. 1996. Is Kant a retributivist?. History of Political Thought. 17 (Spring): 60–78.Google Scholar
  79. von Hirsch, Andrew. 1991. Proportionality in the philosophy of punishment: From ‘Why Punish?’ to ‘How Much?’. Israel Law Journal 25 (Summer–Autumn): 549–380.Google Scholar
  80. von Hirsch, Andrew. 1993. Censure and sanctions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Walker, Nigel. 1991. Why punish?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Walker, Nigel. 1999. Even more varieties of retribution. Philosophy 74 (October): 595–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Walker, Margaret Urban. 2006. Restorative justice and reparations. Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (Fall): 377–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Walls, Jerry L. 2004. A hell of a dilemma: Rejoinder to Talbott. Religious Studies 40 (June): 225–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zaibert, Leo. 2006. Punishment as revenge. Law and Philosophy 25 (January): 81–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyIllinois Institute of TechnologyChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations