W5 Q - "Eye for an Eye" Nathanson Flashcards
The principle of lex talionis would require us to
Rape rapists
Nathanson claims that the principle of lex talionis would give us no guidance in devising a punishment for
Drunk driving
If Nathanson’s proportional retributivism is true, then
murder must be punished more harshly than assault
Nathanson claims that a great benefit of abolishing the death penalty would be that
it would send a symbolic message that killing is not acceptable except in self-defense.
According to Nathanson, when someone commits murder, he
gives up some, but not all, of his rights
According to Nathanson, what helps determine whether a punishment is just?
- What the wrongdoer did
- What the punishment is for worse crimes
- Whether the punishment respects human dignity
According to Nathanson, the proportionality principle fails to support the death penalty because
The principle is silent about what the most severe punishment should be.
According to Nathanson, “human desert” is that which someone deserves in virtue of
Her humanity itself
According to Nathanson, why is the principle of lex talionis initially attractive?
- It’s consistent with our intuition that what a person deserves depends on what he does.
- It doesn’t appear to depend on any particular legal or political institution.
- It seems to provide a clear measure for the appropriateness of punishment.
According to Nathanson, the punishment for some crime is just only if
Worse crimes are punished more harshly, while lesser crimes are punished less harshly.
What maxim best summarized the principle of lex talionis?
An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
Nathanson objects to lex talionis because it
- Would be very difficult to apply
- Gives us no guidance in a number of instances
- Would require us totorture torturers
What is inconsistent with Nathanson’s proportional retributivism?
Punishing an innocent person to prevent a riot.
What sort of rights do murderers have in Nathanson’s view?
Some basic rights but not as many as ordinary people.
Nathanson claims that abaloishing the death penalty would
be inconsistent with lex talionois.
