relevance of moral responsibility to reward & punishment

Question 1

key terms - therapeutic punishment, just deserts

Answer 1

therapeutic punishment - treatment/punishment aimed at helping criminal rather than being retributive
just deserts - view that punishment for crimes should be proportionate to seriousness of crime

Question 2

approaches to crime & socially deviant behaviour - crime is a mental condition & an illness that can be treated

Answer 2

• this accepts that there are determining factors in individuals life for which they cannot be blamed/limited blame
• example: individual may have been brought up in domestic environment of violence
• lack of education can mean limited grasp of how & why people should behave in a responsible manner
• means treatment should be therapeutic
• thus means corporal punishment is inappropriate as will lead to re-offending & capital punishment inappropriate as ultimate injustice
• therapy centres on reform & offering a chance to start a new life
• like a reward as person isn’t so much sufferring disagreeable as having something beneficial imposed

Question 3

approaches to crime & socially deviant behaviour - crime is deliberately anti-social behaviour & should be punished

Answer 3

• punishment of retribution allows criminal to pay for crime
• this is simple justice as to some extent compensates the victim & allows criminal to pay for his crimes
• signifies society’s disapproval of criminal acts & acts as a deterrent
• enforces idea of responsibility where criminals aren’t punished they’ll re-offend
• main negative of reform is it’s costly & ineffective
• punishment is also needed to protect society from criminals

Question 4

consequences of moral responsibility theory for reward & punishment - hard determinism

Answer 4

• if HD is true, no freedom of kind required for moral responsibility
• it’s pointless punishing those who murder, rob, rape etc or rewarding those who don’t as all events are determined
• if our behaviour is determined so is our system of rewards & punishments
• in religious sense (if true) any idea of ‘sin’ against god becomes redundant as none can be blamed by god for what their creator makes them do
• also means Christianity is incoherent as central doctrine of jesus’ atonement for human sin is pointless as is doctrine for morally good behaviour
• augustine & calvin believed some predestined for heaven & others for hell as result of god’s omniscience
• skinner believed his work would led to reform of all practises of praise & blame, reward & punishment
• argued punishing for antisocial isn’t effective as when its over they’ll revert to original behaviour
• also makes people resentful
• psychological conditioningg can direct what people desire or want so can be conditioned in future so desire to do nothing harmful

Question 5

consequences of moral responsibility theory for reward & punishment - hard determinism critique

Answer 5

• to libertarians, ideas like these are incoherent as for determinist any attempt to apply conditioning must itself be determined by existing conditions
• for a psychological to engage a patient in reconditioning must be a waste of time - whole matrix of moral responsibility, reward & punishment is what ‘is’

Question 6

consequences of moral responsibility theory for reward & punishment - libertarianism

Answer 6

• must hold people responsible for their actions hence praise & blame, reward & punishment part of the libertarian strategy for leading people to be morally responsible
• law in uk acknowledges diminished responsibility for a number of different types of people & situations such as children those with depression & the mentally abused
• defence lawyers make every effort to take into account the situation with social circumstances & mental state
• kant insits ‘ought implies can’ which is a libertarian pov - we feel moral compulsion concerning what we ‘ought’ to do strongly suggesting we’re free to do it
• freedom is clear from fact we’re able to override that compulsion & do otherwise
• we can still feel guilt when failing to do what we ought which is indicative of moral freedom
• kant offers libertarian account of punishment of retribution
• we can be free internally to follow the mora law & externally by being able to pursue our own ends
• in state of nature (no laws) we lack external freedom as others can enforce their own choices with violence so we might have to be violent in return
• to have external freedom we have to live under rule of law & if someone in society breaks the law they limit others freedom & damages law itself

Question 7

consequences of moral responsibility theory for reward & punishment - libertarian weakness

Answer 7

• weakness of libertarian is if determinism is true then libertarian is a kind of determined response to moral issues
• some conditioned to believe they’re causally determined others conditioned to believe they’re causally free

Question 8

consequences of moral responsibility theory for reward & punishment - compatibilism (view on moral responsibility)

Answer 8

• action is free if agent could’ve done otherwise
• see themselves as morally responsible as their moral choices aren’t the result of physical constraints & acted as they did despite aware of other options
• where peoples actions are done through ignorance we can say they’re wrong but those concerned aren’t morally responsible
• for hume, makes no sense to punish/reward someone when actions are result of factors apart from what they chose
• hume argues people are blameworthy only where our choices come from our character
• his approach is to better society & i largely in accord with first approach to crime & punishment where it should help to repress anti-social behaviour
• shows why christian idea of eternal reward in heaven & eternal punishment in hell makes little sense

Question 9

consequences of moral responsibility theory for reward & punishment - compatibilism problems

Answer 9

• one involves just deserts where theory of punishment should be proportionate to severity of the crime. andrew von hirsch book argued that the ‘treatment’ model of punishment should be replaced with a judicial system of sentencing criminal according to his or her just desert
• strong suspicion it is incoherent with even hume admitting causal determinism may well be true
• hume’s approach of ‘necessity’ as ‘constant conjunction’ rejected by determinists & libertarians