Research Paper Number

32/2012

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2012

Keywords

corrective justice; criminal law; general deterrence; incommensurability; justice; moral justification of punishment; state punishment

Abstract

In this essay, I address one methodological aspect of Victor Tadros's The Ends of Harm - namely, the moral character of the theory of criminal punishment it defends. First, I offer a brief reconstruction of this dimension of the argument, highlighting some of its distinctive strengths while drawing attention to particular inconsistencies. I then argue that Tadros ought to refrain from developing this approach in terms of an overly narrow understanding of the morality of harming as fully unified and reconciled under the lone heading of justice. In a final and most critical section, I offer arguments for why this reconciliatory commitment, further constrained by a misplaced emphasis on corrective justice, generates major problems for his general deterrence account of the core justification of criminal punishment.

Download

Request a copy that is accessible using assistive technology (link opens in a new window)

Share

COinS