This essay is a response to the excellent contributions to the double special issue of Law and Philosophy on my book The Ends of Harm. I further defend the Duty View of punishment outlined in the book, responding to criticisms of that view. I also challenge the plausibility of retributivist accounts offered in response to the challenges to that view developed in The Ends of Harm
Many criminal law theorists find the punishment of harm puzzling. They argue that acts should be eva...
This piece is a review essay on Victor Tadros’s The Ends of Harm. Tadros rejects retributive desert ...
In philosophical writings, the practice of punishment standardly features as a terrain over which co...
Retributive tbeory has long held pride of place among theories of criminal punishment in both philos...
Retributive theory has long held pride of place among theories of criminal punishment in both philos...
In this essay, I raise a complex and contentious question: what is the role of punishment in a resto...
First paragraph: Retributivism needs saving not only from its plentiful enemies, but from some of it...
In ‘Why Criminal Law: A Question of Content?’, Douglas Husak argues that an analysis of the justifia...
How can the brutal and costly enterprise of criminal punishment be justified? This text makes a cont...
Two main types of principle, retributive and consequentialist, have long been identified as the main...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This article identifies two mistakes commonly made about the concept of punishment. First, confusion...
The retributive principle is that offenders should be punished because and only because they have cu...
The concept of harm and the nature of its proper role in the criminal law has challenged legislators...
Many criminal law theorists find the punishment of harm puzzling. They argue that acts should be eva...
This piece is a review essay on Victor Tadros’s The Ends of Harm. Tadros rejects retributive desert ...
In philosophical writings, the practice of punishment standardly features as a terrain over which co...
Retributive tbeory has long held pride of place among theories of criminal punishment in both philos...
Retributive theory has long held pride of place among theories of criminal punishment in both philos...
In this essay, I raise a complex and contentious question: what is the role of punishment in a resto...
First paragraph: Retributivism needs saving not only from its plentiful enemies, but from some of it...
In ‘Why Criminal Law: A Question of Content?’, Douglas Husak argues that an analysis of the justifia...
How can the brutal and costly enterprise of criminal punishment be justified? This text makes a cont...
Two main types of principle, retributive and consequentialist, have long been identified as the main...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This article identifies two mistakes commonly made about the concept of punishment. First, confusion...
The retributive principle is that offenders should be punished because and only because they have cu...
The concept of harm and the nature of its proper role in the criminal law has challenged legislators...
Many criminal law theorists find the punishment of harm puzzling. They argue that acts should be eva...
This piece is a review essay on Victor Tadros’s The Ends of Harm. Tadros rejects retributive desert ...
In philosophical writings, the practice of punishment standardly features as a terrain over which co...
DOI
Add to ORKG