在东南亚地区杀人

Kyron Huigens
{"title":"在东南亚地区杀人","authors":"Kyron Huigens","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.97","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"American law students are taught that there are two competing theories of punishment: the retributive theory and the deterrence theory. This is a mistake on the part of their teachers. Both retribution and deterrence are functions of punishment, not theories of punishment. Neither function justifies punishment or has any explanatory significance for issues such as the nature of excuse or proportionality—unless, that is, some moral theory attributes such a justificatory or explanatory role to it. What people usually mean when they refer to a retributive theory of punishment is a deontological theory of punishment, in which a moral duty to take retribution justifies punishment and similarly grounded moral duties are invoked to explain the features of a punishment system. What people usually mean when they refer to a","PeriodicalId":344882,"journal":{"name":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Homicide in Aretaic Terms\",\"authors\":\"Kyron Huigens\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.97\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"American law students are taught that there are two competing theories of punishment: the retributive theory and the deterrence theory. This is a mistake on the part of their teachers. Both retribution and deterrence are functions of punishment, not theories of punishment. Neither function justifies punishment or has any explanatory significance for issues such as the nature of excuse or proportionality—unless, that is, some moral theory attributes such a justificatory or explanatory role to it. What people usually mean when they refer to a retributive theory of punishment is a deontological theory of punishment, in which a moral duty to take retribution justifies punishment and similarly grounded moral duties are invoked to explain the features of a punishment system. What people usually mean when they refer to a\",\"PeriodicalId\":344882,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Buffalo Criminal Law Review\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Buffalo Criminal Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.97\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.97","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

美国法律专业的学生被教导说,有两种相互竞争的惩罚理论:报应理论和威慑理论。这是他们老师的错误。惩罚和威慑都是惩罚的功能,而不是惩罚理论。这两种功能都不能证明惩罚是正当的,也不能对诸如借口或比例的性质等问题有任何解释意义——除非,也就是说,某些道德理论将这种正当或解释作用赋予它。人们通常所说的报应性惩罚理论是一种义务论的惩罚理论,其中,采取报应的道德义务证明了惩罚的正当性,类似的基于道德的义务被用来解释惩罚系统的特征。人们通常指的是什么
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Homicide in Aretaic Terms
American law students are taught that there are two competing theories of punishment: the retributive theory and the deterrence theory. This is a mistake on the part of their teachers. Both retribution and deterrence are functions of punishment, not theories of punishment. Neither function justifies punishment or has any explanatory significance for issues such as the nature of excuse or proportionality—unless, that is, some moral theory attributes such a justificatory or explanatory role to it. What people usually mean when they refer to a retributive theory of punishment is a deontological theory of punishment, in which a moral duty to take retribution justifies punishment and similarly grounded moral duties are invoked to explain the features of a punishment system. What people usually mean when they refer to a
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Murder After the Merger: A Commentary on Finkelstein Group Violence and Group Vengeance: Toward a Retributivist Theory of International Criminal Law Benthamite Reflections on Codification of the General Principles of Criminal Liability: Towards the Panopticon The Politics of Grace: On the Moral Justification of Executive Clemency Toward a Better Categorical Balance of the Costs and Benefits of the Exclusionary Rule
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1