|
License Agreement on scientific materials use.
|
CRITICISM OF “RETRIBUTIVISM” THEORY IN CONTEMPORARY RESEARCHERS’ WORKS
|
Mikhail Nikolaevich Artemenkov
Smolensk State University
Tat'yana Igorevna Potapenkova
Smolensk State University
|
|
Submitted:
November 26, 2012
|
|
Abstract.
The authors reveal the basic propositions of “retributivism” theory, in particular stated in I. Kant’s political-legal doctrine, and pay special attention to the criticism of this theory in contemporary law theorists’ works, emphasizing the propositions that do not allow the “theory of retribution” being the basis of modern approach to the formation of punishment execution system.
|
Key words and phrases:
политико-правовая доктрина
теория «ретрибутивизма»
возмездие
наказание
political-legal doctrine
“retributivism” theory
retribution
punishment
|
|
Open
the whole article in PDF format. Free PDF-files viewer can be downloaded here.
|
|
References:
- Артеменков М. Н. Основные положения теории наказания в работах И. Канта // История государства и права. 2011. № 8. С. 18-20.
- Кант И. Основы метафизики нравственности. М., 1999.
- Моисеев С. В. Философия права. Новосибирск, 2004.
- Duff A., Garland D. A Reader on Punishment. L., 1994.
- Hampton J. Political Philosophy. Boulder, 1996.
- Kevin M. Punishment [Электронный ресурс] // Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL: http://www.iep.utm.edu (дата обращения: 10.09.2012).
- Kidder T. Mountains beyond Mountains. N. Y., 2003.
- McCloskey H. A Non-Utilitarian Approach to Punishment // Philosophical Perspectives on Punishment. Albany, 1972.
- Packer H. The Limits of the Criminal Sanction. Stanford, 1968.
- Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, 1999.
- Shafer-Landau R. Retributivism and Desert // Pacific Philosophical Quarterly. 2000. Vol. 81.
- Ten C. Crime, Guilt and Punishment. Oxford, 1987.
- Walker N. Why Punish? N. Y., 1991.
|
