Difference Between Retributivism And Utilitarianism

Retributivism and utilitarianism are two opposing ways of approaching punishment. The retributive view of punishment is backward-looking, while the utilitarian view is forward-looking. Retributivism pays more attention to the crime itself and what amends need to be made. Typically this results in harsher punishments. Immanuel Kant and Michael Davis both advocate for this system in their articles. However, they purposefully disregard how a punishment could affect society. For example, punishments for possession of drugs are retributivist in nature. They typically ignore rehabilitation and treatment for a possible addiction, which would be the utilitarian solution. Instead they follow the idea that drugs are immoral and whoever uses them should
In favor of the death penalty is the fact that many people support it and want to see it administered, particularly for vengeance but also for deterrence and public safety. These people unquestionably play a part in lawmakers deciding whether or not to support capital punishment. On the other hand, capital punishment sacrifices a great deal and in reality gains very little in terms of safety. In addition to the given loss of a life, the cost of trying capital punishment cases is immense and the majority of death sentences are overturned on appeal. Because of this imbalance, I don’t believe the death penalty is justified. Administering it costs too much, both in money and in pain caused, for it to be justified, especially considering the lack of evidence that the death penalty increases deterrence. Though many people support the death penalty, and utilitarianism does boast that “everybody counts for one, nobody counts for more than one,” in a situation where one person is dying and one person is materially unaffected, we must give more weight to the person at
Executions would be considered an inequality, and I don’t see how they could be expedient enough to outweigh the discrepancy of it. As mentioned above, administering the death penalty is actually rather costly and inexpedient. It takes decades to complete, and only a fraction of those eligible for the death penalty actually get executed, even after the years of work. In addition to the time, it costs an incredible amount of money in legal expenses. Mill’s utilitarian view of justice could not allow for such inequities in who lives and who dies, especially not those which are so inexpedient for society as a