Crime and Punishment: Course Title: Applied Philosophy NAME - RAJ MARU I.D. - 2017B5PS0947P
Crime and Punishment: Course Title: Applied Philosophy NAME - RAJ MARU I.D. - 2017B5PS0947P
Crime and Punishment: Course Title: Applied Philosophy NAME - RAJ MARU I.D. - 2017B5PS0947P
WHY PUNISH?
The philosophical debate has tended to focus on the issue of finding a moral justification for
infliction of punishment by the state of individuals. If individual is punished and it is morally
justified, then how to decide appropriate amount of punishment for various individuals
committed different crimes. For example, if a petty thief were to be sentenced ten years of
imprisonment, this would be considered excessive. On the other hand, if a cold-blooded
murderer were released after only one week in jail, this would be condemned as excessively
lenient punishment. This debate has been dominated by normative theories of punishment.
They state the conditions under which punishment is justified and provide the basis for
assessing the correct punishment.
Utilitarian theory
The utilitarian theory justifies punishment solely in terms of its good consequences.
Utilitarian principle follows “maximization of overall happiness”. So, punishment is not
considered as good in itself. every kind of suffering is bad, and to be justified only if it
prevents even greater suffering, or it brings about greater good. the
For example, if a convicted offender is a threat to society and not being punished, an
even greater suffering will fall upon more innocent people and so punishment is
justified. If offender is not punished since he/she will not commit any crime again due to
special circumstances, it will set a bad example on people that they can commit any
crime once and will cause greater suffering in society.
Main problem of utilitarian’s is that they committed to punishing the innocent if by so
doing the best consequences are produced.
For example, suppose a particularly horrific crime is committed by a member of one
racial or religious group against a member of another group. And unless an innocent
member of the first group is framed and punished, the member of the second group will
take the law in their own hands and cause a greater suffering of the society.
They argue that in long run good consequences will outweigh the suffering of innocent
man.
Reformative theory
The reformative theory is the most popular theory today. it contains the elements from
both theories to remedy the defects of utilitarian and retributive theory. It justifies aim
of punishment to be utilitarian goal of preventing or reducing crime but insists that the
pursuit of these aim must be constrained by the requirement that only those who have
voluntarily broken the law may be punished, and their punishment should be
proportionate to the gravity of their offences. It is a combination of utilitarian and
sentimental values and aim to reform the criminal so that he may become adjusted to
the social order rather than to take revenge or set an example.
The method to reduce crime is to reform the criminal by re-educating him in the ways of
society. It requires restriction of liberty and curtailment of rights and privileges, to
produce desirable changes in the personalities of offenders.
According to Bentham, punishment is not an act of anger or revenge but is an act of
calculation, disciplined by considerations of the social good and the offenders needs.
The reformative and utilitarian justification of punishment is that it will persuade the
offender to accept his sufferings and face his own guilt.
CONCLUSION
Various theories attempt to justify punishment ethically and morally keeping in mind the
after consequences and crimes committed by offenders knowingly or accidentally.
All theories aim for betterment of society in their own way. But according to me any
kind of suffering is bad and as Gandhiji said ‘an eye for an eye will make the world blind’.
Punishment should be a way to realize the offender of his wrongdoings and contemplate
on his actions. Punishment is necessary in human civilization to maintain peace and
order.
THE FUTURE OF PUNISHMENT?
No ethical theory justifies the institute of punishment in its present form. Different
theories of punishment identify different flaws in the institution. Whereas our present
practice of punishment appears to serve an essential social purpose in a manner broadly
compatible with widely held ethical views, the institution of punishment survives, and
shows every sign of doing so for a long time to come.