Two Mistakes about the Concept of Punishment

No. Panggil :	eja-21-0184
Nama Orang :	Geeraets, Vincent






Penerbitan :	[Place of publication not identified] : Taylor and Francis - Criminology and Law, 2018

Info Lainnya

Entri Tambahan Nama Orang
Abstrak	This article identifies two mistakes commonly made about the concept of punishment. First, confusion exists about when an analysis of punishment counts as retributive, and when as justificatorily neutral. In particular, a fair number of legal scholars claim to analyze punishment in a neutral way, but closer inspection shows that many of these definitions are not justificatorily neutral. Second, legal scholars tend to analyze the concept of punishment very restrictively, with a focus on the intention of the legislator. While there may be good reasons to restrict the scope of the concept of punishment in the legal arena, from a philosophical point of view, restrictive analysis is not fruitful. It is a bad starting point for critical evaluation, because it is perfectly possible for impositions generally experienced as punitive not to be classified as such. This is all the more troublesome given that these impositions often contain fewer safeguards than are offered in criminal law and that there is sometimes a taboo on the language game related to punishment. I argue that these problems can be overcome by embracing an inclusive, justificatorily neutral concept of punishment that takes the outward appearance of the harm inflicted as its starting point.
001 Hak Akses (open/membership)	membership
Kata Kunci	definition of punishment, retributivism, utilitarianism, Zaibert
ISSN	0731-129X (Print) 1937-5948 (Online)
Tahun Terbit	2018
No. Induk	eja-21-0184
Entri Sumber Data	Taylor and Francis - Criminology and Law
Entri Utama Nama orang	Geeraets, Vincent
Volume, Nomor, Tahun dan Hlm.	vol. 37, no. 1, p. 21-35
Subjek Topik
Barcode	eja-21-0184
Judul Utama	Two Mistakes about the Concept of Punishment
Kode Bahasa	eng
Sumber Koleksi	Perpustakaan Nasional