introtohumanities assignment 5
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Indian River State College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1020
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
6
Uploaded by EarlStraw4263
Assignment 5
In this assignment, we take a look at criminal justice and punishment. There are 5 readings, but some of the readings are fairly short, and the Cohen reading briefly explains all of the ideas
in the other readings. So read that carefully.
Read:
Cohen, “Criminal Justice: Prisons and Corrections,” pp. 170-173.
Golding, “The Deterrence Theory of Punishment,” pp. 173-175.
Nozick, “The Retributive Theory of Punishment: pp. 175-178.
Rawls, “Reconciling the Deterrence and Retributive Theories of Punishment,” pp. 179-182.
Puka, “The Philosopher as Corrections Officer: Doing Time in a Participatory Democracy,” pp. 187-200.
_______________________________
Question 1: What is the deterrence theory of punishment? Explain.
Answer 1:
According to the utilitarian deterrence theory of punishment, a criminal's punishment is appropriate if it has the potential to prevent both others and the offender from committing the same offense in the future. For those who are guilty and others to refrain from the deed in the future, this theory makes use of punishment that is meted out for the benefit of the future. According to this viewpoint, discipline is only beneficial for its beneficial outcomes. According to the deterrence theory of punishment, good intentions justify punishment because it is a means to a goal.
______________________________
Question 2: What criticisms can be made of the deterrence theory
of punishment?
Answer 2:
The deterrence theory of punishment has come under fire for framing innocent people. It holds that punishing the innocent may
be morally justified because it benefits society the most. Regarding this theory, it only counts that people think the suspect
committed a crime, not that he did. The deterrence theory of punishment has also come under fire for allowing for harsh and unfair punishments. According to this theory, harsh and unfair punishments work better to discourage others than less harsh or unfair punishments. The idea that the punishment must match the crime is broken by this element. Another critique of the deterrence theory of punishment is that it fails to make any reference to key retributivist concepts like desert, guilt, and moral
responsibility, all of which are important components of the common understanding of corrective justice in modern society.
____________________________
Question 3: What is the retributive theory of punishment? Explain.
Answer 3:
According to the retributive theory of punishment, punishment is appropriate if it is roughly equivalent to the offense that the criminal did. To put it another way, retributive punishment is a form of behavior in which the offender receives the justice they earn. This theory's takeaway is "this is how incorrect what you did
was." According to this theory, the only way to demonstrate to a criminal how serious his crime was to apply the "eye for an eye" maxim. This theory aims to alter the offender's moral development by making him or her understand how bad what was
done was.
___________________________
Question 4: What criticisms can be made of the retributive theory of punishment?
Answer 4:
The retributive theory of punishment is subject to criticism because doing the same action to the offender will not cause them to change their behavior. For instance, the retributive theory
of retribution holds that a murderer must be killed for them to realize what was wrong with what they did. However, if they are deceased, how will they be able to improve their morals and remember what they did? As a result, a criticism of this theory is that it cannot always be applied to offenses where the victim receives the same punishment.
__________________________
Question 5: Which theory of punishment is best? Which one do you prefer and why? Explain what you think is good about each view, and what you think is be bad about each of them, and why.
Answer 5:
The deterrence theory of punishment, in my opinion, is the most effective and fair way to cope with crimes. I like this theory better than the retributive theory of punishment because it has less harsh punishments than the retributive theory and its goal is to reconnect the offender with the right values and strengthen his or
her morals. The deterrence theory, in my opinion, works well because it stops people from committing their misdeeds again as well as others in the future. But what is bad about it is that while it prioritizes future safety, I fear it may not allow for full accountability to be taken. The retributive theory, in my opinion, is beneficial because it emphasizes having an equal punishment for the crime that was done as well as more suitable punishments for the wrongdoings. This theory is flawed, though, because it occasionally imposes unthinkable punishments.
________________________
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Question 6: How does Rawls attempt to reconcile the deterrence and retributive theories of punishment? What does he say about each? Why does he think his reconciliation is good?
Answer 6:
In his attempt to reconcile the retributive and deterrence theories of punishment, he compares them as well as to supports both. According to Rawl's defense of the deterrence theory of punishment, the offense that has occurred in the past has no bearing on the appropriate course of action in the present day. He
holds that only the effects of choices made today will be felt in the future. According to Rawl's defense of the retributive theory of
discipline, the severity of the penalty should be commensurate with the severity of the offense. He believes that his reconciliation
is effective because both theories can be applied to deal with various real-world situations and determine the fate of the offender and their misdeeds.
_______________________
Question 7: What criticisms could be made against Rawls’ view? Is
Rawls’ view good or not? Explain why or why not.
Answer 7:
One of Rawl's arguments can be criticized for rationalizing utilitarianism. Too many cruel penalties can be justified by utilitarianism in the name of society's happiness. Additionally, it permits the punishment of innocent people without reason solely because it benefits society the most. Retributionists aimed to strengthen the utilitarian viewpoint by asserting that punishment is justifiable if it promotes social harmony and no one's rights are infringed. I believe Rawl's point of view is solid because he clearly explains why the theories are both helpful and how they work in society to promote benefits. He also clearly differentiates between
the views.
______________________
Question 8: Describe Puka’s “just community” approach to punishment. What is going on in the just community? How does it differ from other approaches and what does Puka think are its advantages over the deterrence and retributive theories?
Answer 8:
Longtime employee Bill Puka helped in a Just Community Unit in a
state prison while working at the Niantic State Correctional Facility, which was run by the Harvard Center for Moral Development. The initiative aimed to enhance the prisoners' relationship and cognitive skills. A social contract was established and participatory democracy was established within the prison unit thanks to the Just Community's purpose. The company as a whole made decisions regarding internal rules and duties. Coercion and favoritism were replaced with unity, open debate, tranquility, and majority control. This strategy is different from the
others because it aims to rebuild the inmate's character without using discipline. It restores morals in the prisoners in a more justifiable manner by letting them see what they made mistakes on so that they understand and won't do it again, according to Puka, who believes that this theory has advantages over the deterrence and retributive theories.
_____________________
Question 9: What are some criticisms of Puka’s just community approach to punishment? What could the deterrence and retributive theorists say against his approach?
Answer 9:
Some have criticized Puka's Just Community method of punishment because they believe that it will leave inmates with unrealistic expectations of what the real world is like when they leave the program. Many ex-offenders claim that the unit left them in some ways more vulnerable to the risks and harms of the outside world, gave them unreal ideas of fair treatment, made them too gullible, and reduced their willingness to follow the route
of intimidation. Since the program gave them a false sense of hope, many ex-offenders even claimed that life was harder
outside and that they were unable to find employment to support themselves monetarily. According to deterrence theorists, the inmates must be punished to prevent them from committing the same offense again. Additionally, they would claim that small bands and therapy wouldn't alter them or provide the necessary reality check. Since the criminals were so quickly transformed and
treated as if they had not committed an immoral act, the retributive theorists would argue that this strategy offered the offenders a simple way out. They would also argue that their punishment needs to be equally as bad as the crime committed.
________________________
Question 10: Is Puka’s just community approach to punishment good or bad? Should we use it or not? Explain why or why not.
Answer 10:
Because it essentially offers the prisoners a second opportunity, I believe Puka's just community approach to punishment is good and should be used. With this strategy, they have an opportunity to improve mentally and reintegrate into society. In my view, using rehabilitation instead of discipline would be much more beneficial for the prisoners because it would allow them to see and understand what they did wrong and prevent them from repeating it. This strategy provides a much more justifiable form of punishment that does not call for severe penalties.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help