Punishment: Utilitarianism Or Retributivism?
Governments have several different theories to support the use of punishment to maintain the social order. Those theories of punishment aim to provide understanding of why and how we punish. Generally, two of the most frequently used justifications of punishment are Retributivism and Utilitarianism. Retributivism is a theory of criminal justice that advocates punishment to be the best response and consequence in retribution for what criminals have inflicted.
It is also the first theory answering the reason why we established punishment institutions. Since in retributivism, it is justified to punish people when and only when they deserve to be punished, which is can be summed up as “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” from the …show more content…
Under utilitarianism, whether an
action is right or wrong only has to do with whether good or bad the results that it
produces. Therefore laws should be used to maximize the happiness of the society
more than any other reasons. As punishment and crimes are discordant with
happiness, they should be eliminated to the minimum.
We can conclude philosopher Immanuel Kant is a Retributivist from several
theories and concepts he formulated in his books that indicates his value towards
punishment. In the 19th century, Kant wrote in The Metaphysical Elements of Justice
of retribution as a legal principle: “Judicial punishment can never be used merely as
a means to promote some other good for the criminal himself or for civil society, but
instead it must in all cases be imposed on him only on the ground that he has
committed a crime”. Kant regards punishment on criminals as a matter of justice
that if guilty are not punished, justice is not done. [2][3]
Also, In Kant’s “Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals” published in 1785,
he introduced a universal and impartial philosophical concept called categorical
imperatives as a way of evaluating moral motivations for actions. The reason that …show more content…
Kant told us
there are reasons why humans are “ends in themselves”. First of all, humans have
the ability to think and to choose, we have practical reasons for what we are going to
do. Also, human determine ends through practical reason since we have autonomy,
which means we do things out of our free wills. We create laws and set up moral
standards for activities in the society like no other animals or things. Lastly, humans
have unique intrinsic value more than just instrumental value as tools, which makes
us must be respected for what we have done. Thus, Kant believes that, conducting
punishment on a rational being who commits a crime for what he has done is a
respect for the person, for the reason that he should have thought thoroughly the
consequence before committing a crime. Kant also thought that murders require
It is also the first theory answering the reason why we established punishment institutions. Since in retributivism, it is justified to punish people when and only when they deserve to be punished, which is can be summed up as “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” from the …show more content…
Under utilitarianism, whether an
action is right or wrong only has to do with whether good or bad the results that it
produces. Therefore laws should be used to maximize the happiness of the society
more than any other reasons. As punishment and crimes are discordant with
happiness, they should be eliminated to the minimum.
We can conclude philosopher Immanuel Kant is a Retributivist from several
theories and concepts he formulated in his books that indicates his value towards
punishment. In the 19th century, Kant wrote in The Metaphysical Elements of Justice
of retribution as a legal principle: “Judicial punishment can never be used merely as
a means to promote some other good for the criminal himself or for civil society, but
instead it must in all cases be imposed on him only on the ground that he has
committed a crime”. Kant regards punishment on criminals as a matter of justice
that if guilty are not punished, justice is not done. [2][3]
Also, In Kant’s “Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals” published in 1785,
he introduced a universal and impartial philosophical concept called categorical
imperatives as a way of evaluating moral motivations for actions. The reason that …show more content…
Kant told us
there are reasons why humans are “ends in themselves”. First of all, humans have
the ability to think and to choose, we have practical reasons for what we are going to
do. Also, human determine ends through practical reason since we have autonomy,
which means we do things out of our free wills. We create laws and set up moral
standards for activities in the society like no other animals or things. Lastly, humans
have unique intrinsic value more than just instrumental value as tools, which makes
us must be respected for what we have done. Thus, Kant believes that, conducting
punishment on a rational being who commits a crime for what he has done is a
respect for the person, for the reason that he should have thought thoroughly the
consequence before committing a crime. Kant also thought that murders require