Victor's Justice: The Next Best Moral Theory of Punishment?

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2013

Source Publication

Law and Philosophy

Keywords

Criminal law--Moral and ethical aspects; Punishment--Moral and ethical aspects; Criminal law--Philosophy; Punishment--Philosophy

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.

Comments

This article was previously published as a research paper in the Comparative Research in Law and Political Economy series.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Link to Full Text

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

Share

COinS