How can hard determinism deal with the need to punish, when coupled with the obligation to be just? I argue that even though hard determinists might find it morally permissible to incarcerate wrongdoers apart from lawful society, they are committed to the punishment's taking a very different form from common practice in contemporary Western societies. Hard determinists are in fact committed to what I will call funishment, instead of punishment. But, by its nature funishment is a practical reductio of hard determinism: it makes implementing hard determinism impossible to contemplate. Indeed, the social practices that hard determinism requires turn out to be morally bad even according to hard determinism itself. I conclude by briefly reflecting upon the implications. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
CITATION STYLE
Smilansky, S. (2011). Hard Determinism and Punishment: A Practical Reductio. Law and Philosophy, 30(3), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-011-9099-9
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.