00:00:00
PROFESSOR: All right, so where
we are in the context of the
00:00:04
course is on our second
lecture on punishment.
00:00:09
So you'll recall that before the
break we had been thinking
00:00:13
about what sorts of moral norms
are appropriate: What
00:00:19
sort of principle underlies our
00:00:23
specification of moral norms?
00:00:25
And we're now looking at those
same cluster of questions from
00:00:30
the opposite side.
00:00:32
We're looking at that cluster
of questions from the
00:00:35
perspective of what ought to go
on when somebody violates
00:00:40
those norms, either qua moral
norms or qua legal norms as
00:00:46
encoded in a society's
set of statutes.
00:00:51
And we were looking at a number
of justifications that
00:00:55
might be offered for the
practice of punishment.
00:01:00
And we talked briefly, and I'll
say a little bit more
00:01:02
today, about the bottom two
of these: restitution and
00:01:06
But we spent the bulk of the
second half of Tuesday's
00:01:11
lecture thinking about
backward-looking
00:01:14
justification, which in many
ways is analogous to the sort
00:01:19
of justification of moral
constraint that we see in the
00:01:23
deontological picture.
00:01:25
What I want to do now is to look
at the first of these in
00:01:30
some detail, and to think about
what a forward-looking
00:01:34
or consequentialist picture
of punishment looks like.
00:01:40
And to think about the ways in
which the problems that arise
00:01:44
for a consequentialist account
of punishment seem to echo a
00:01:48
number of the problems that
arise for a consequentialist
00:01:52
account of morality
more generally.
00:01:54
So just to remind you what the
characterization of punishment
00:01:59
that we're working with looks
like, of which the most
00:02:02
important clause is going to be
the first, we're making use
00:02:06
of the classic mid-century
characterization of punishment
00:02:10
that comes out of the
Anglo-American legal
00:02:14
philosophical tradition.
00:02:16
And what's key in thinking
through the justification of
00:02:21
punishment from a
consequentialist perspective
00:02:25
is to remember that punishment
is done in response to a legal
00:02:29
offense, is done by one judge
to the offender, and so on.
00:02:33
But it's also something that, as
part of what punishment is,
00:02:39
involves the imposition of
unpleasantness and suffering
00:02:44
on the person to whom
conditions two
00:02:47
through five apply.
00:02:49
And the question we're trying to
answer for ourselves is how
00:02:54
a state could ever be justified
in bringing
00:02:59
deliberate disutility to
one of its members.
00:03:04
So what the harm reduction or
consequentialist outlook says
00:03:09
is that the sole goal of, or
the sole justification for,
00:03:15
punishment is to prevent or
deter future wrongdoing.
00:03:22
Consequentialist accounts,
in their pure forms, are
показать еще
русский▼
English
