<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=andie_nachgeborenen@yahoo.com
href="mailto:andie_nachgeborenen@yahoo.com">andie nachgeborenen</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org
href="mailto:lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org">lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 23, 2003 10:58 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [lbo-talk] Framed (Was Everything's coming up
roses)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> I did some research over the weekend, not having really thought about
justifications for </DIV>
<DIV>> retributivism before -- a terrible confession for a sometime moral
philosopher, I know -- and > I think I can say that there is a plausible
standard account that answers the most obvious </DIV>
<DIV>> objections to the doctrine in the classic formulations by Kant and
Hegel. (Btw there is a </DIV>
<DIV>> paper by, i think, Jeff Murphie that argues that Marx is a
retributivist -- have it, but didn't </DIV>
<DIV>> review it for this.) K & H have free-will based versions of the
doctrine that end up holding </DIV>
<DIV>> that punishment is a "right" of the perpetrator, something which it
would bea s wrong to deny > him as it would be to steal his property.
Now, whatever one thinks of the existence of free </DIV>
<DIV>> will, it would nice if one's justification of punishment didn't depend
on controversial </DIV>
<DIV>> metaphysics, </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Maybe you can get a defense of retribution grounded
in principles of distributive justice to go through (just like maybe one
can get a defense of punishment grounded in consequentialist considerations
to go through). But, like in the framed case (it seems as though it is
wrong to punish someone who is innocent not because doing so will have bad
consequences, though it may, but because the person is _innocent_), it seems as
though our intuition that the guilty deserve punishment is most clearly rooted
in our prior intuitions about responsibility (which gets us into the tricky
metaphysical terrain you want to avoid) and not distributive
justice.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>-- Luke</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>