ok so lets start
Justice or judgment has come to stand for a combination of three thing; firstly it is a means of repayment of the crime to the victim (retribution), next as the method of deterring others from committing the same crime (Deterrence) and lastly as a system to teach the criminal a lesson (Rehabilitation).
this thread intends to brings into question of morality of the first two factors of justice and by thus doing present the primary criteria for justice as: the best method of teaching the criminal the errors of their ways.
at the very least it intends to prove that Justice is fundamentally flawed when it negates the possibility for the judged to learn from their mistakes, as this denies the criminal the very right of being human.
at the heart of this problem lies the idea of morality, i will use kant’s categorical imperative:”Always act according to that maxim whose universality as a law you can at the same time will” as i can see no great flaw in this definition. act in a way that if it were universal law you would still agree with it.
in understanding Retributive justice and Deterrence we must look at the reasons they exist and the outcomes they hope to achieve.
retributive justice is an attempt to right the wrong that has been committed. it stems from the jewish law of moses that states “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” however the in modern law the retribution is not always equivalent to the crime.
Deterrence is an attempt to discourage the general public from committing the same offense. It is a method of teaching the public a set of morals, using fear of consequence.
is it possible to right a wrong?, how can this be achieved?, what benefit does retribution achieve?, who does it benefit? how is retribution different from revenge? how can the justice system be above the moral law it is trying to protect?
is it possible for people to learn new morals or strengthen old ones? how can this be achieved? is fear a good method of achieving this? is it moral for a governments to use fear as a method of governance?
is free will and thus the ability to change not what defines humanity?
these question will be examined and with any luck answered in future posts. but i think you can see were i’m heading.
