Embracing a Deweyan Approach to Punishment
International Journal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Activities, Vol: 6, Issue: 1
2023
- 30Usage
- 2Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage30
- Downloads28
- Abstract Views2
- Captures2
- Readers2
Article Description
Kant’s retributive theory of punishment, resting on the notion of desert, i.e., deserved reward or punishment, assumes responsibility of the moral agent. On the contrary, a Deweyan approach to punishment does not assume responsibility, but rather, aims to cultivate it. These two different approaches ground two very different theories of punishment. In this essay, I compare these two divergent approaches, emphasizing their conflicting notions of what it means to treat criminals as moral agents. Ultimately, I demonstrate that moral responsibility is not to be assumed, but rather, is something to be cultivated. The point of punishment should not be to punish merely because one deserves to be punished, for upon investigation, the notion of desert proves fruitless. The point of punishment should be to morally cultivate.
Bibliographic Details
Central Washington University
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know