Good consequences

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68378122%3A_____%2F11%3A00360865" target="_blank" >RIV/68378122:_____/11:00360865 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Good consequences

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

This essay considers the problem of justification of punishment. Philosophers of criminal law developed a whole range of competing theories, which answer this question by their own manner. Of course, each of these theories has its strengths and weaknesses. Traditionally, the most pronounced among these theories are two, i.e. retributivism and consequentialism. If put very simply, the consequentialist justifications (e.g. Bentham, Sidgwick) of punishment lie in the fact that punishment is only justifiable on the basis of its good consequences, while retributivist theories (e.g. Kant, Hegel) present within their mainstream an opinion that punishment is justified only when a punished person deserves it. The author argues that we need a combined theory. Normative jurisprudence should not be satisfied with simple utilitarianism (maximization of social utility), but it should tie it to deontological constraints limitations, specifically to the requirement to respect an autonomy of an individ

Název v anglickém jazyce

Good consequences

Popis výsledku anglicky

This essay considers the problem of justification of punishment. Philosophers of criminal law developed a whole range of competing theories, which answer this question by their own manner. Of course, each of these theories has its strengths and weaknesses. Traditionally, the most pronounced among these theories are two, i.e. retributivism and consequentialism. If put very simply, the consequentialist justifications (e.g. Bentham, Sidgwick) of punishment lie in the fact that punishment is only justifiable on the basis of its good consequences, while retributivist theories (e.g. Kant, Hegel) present within their mainstream an opinion that punishment is justified only when a punished person deserves it. The author argues that we need a combined theory. Normative jurisprudence should not be satisfied with simple utilitarianism (maximization of social utility), but it should tie it to deontological constraints limitations, specifically to the requirement to respect an autonomy of an individ

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

AG - Právní vědy

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

Z - Vyzkumny zamer (s odkazem do CEZ)

Rok uplatnění

2011

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Právník

ISSN

0231-6625

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

150/1

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

6

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

28

Strana od-do

3-30

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—