Abstract
How can hard determinism deal with the need to punish, when coupled with the obligation to be just? I argue that even though hard determinists might find it morally permissible to incarcerate wrongdoers apart from lawful society, they are committed to the punishment's taking a very different form from common practice in contemporary Western societies. Hard determinists are in fact committed to what I will call funishment, instead of punishment. But, by its nature funishment is a practical reductio of hard determinism: it makes implementing hard determinism impossible to contemplate. Indeed, the social practices that hard determinism requires turn out to be morally bad even according to hard determinism itself. I conclude by briefly reflecting upon the implications.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 353-367 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Law and Philosophy |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 2011 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Philosophy
- Law
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Hard Determinism and Punishment: A Practical Reductio'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver