REWARD AND PUNISHMENT Distributive Justice Good and bad

REWARD AND PUNISHMENT

Distributive Justice Good and bad on a just and fair basis Aspects of reward and punishment Elements of justice Treatment of humans by other humans Concerned with past events Individualistic in application Comparative justice can be applied in relation to another person

Reward Four ways which it can be distributed As equally among people as possible According to people’s abilities According to what they deserve According to their needs

Equal Distribution of Rewards Example with medial resources, lottery or chance method also applicable Problems Ignores other criteria Difficult to determine how and if people are equal

Other Possible Reward Systems Based on production, ignores effort or ability Several problems with effort as well Not paid for effort Difficult to measure How is skill measured Ability Should natural ability be rewarded? Acquired ability? Do people use their abilities well?

Other Possible Reward Systems Based on need Private need or public need Other criteria in employment Training inside professions Level of equipment utilized Physical danger Job unpleasantness Seniority What are the problems with each?

Two Major Reward Theories Retributivist People should be rewarded based on merit Not concerned with future good consequences Tends to reward efforts rather than achievement Utilitarian People should be rewarded based on future good consequences Would be in favor of higher pay for the worst jobs Would reward production, not effort If consequences are the only criteria then it is possible to reward an undeserving person

John Rawls Locke said natural lights given by God Rawls – they are given by a just society Two basic principles Equality, each person has equal rights to maximum liberty Difference, inequality is possible if it’s to everyone’s advantage Believed wealth is society’s, not the individuals

Evaluating Rawls’ Theory Advantages Fits well with capitalism Allow for freedom, but also fair distribution Provides a way to arrive at rules by the veil of ignorance Tries to balance individual rights with collective good Disadvantages Doesn’t fit in with conservative views Can you operate from veil of ignorance Can difference principle operate successfully Rawls ignores other theories

Punishment Four requirements Unpleasantness Based on reason Imposed by legal authority Rules or laws Needs a legal system Ruling is accepted Can be unbiased

Retributive Punishment Given only when it is deserved Why crime requires punishment Reestablish morality Self-restraint must be restored to eliminate unfair advantages Problems Difficult to determine what people observe Difficult to utilize mercy Difficult to determine the seriousness of offenses Are there appropriate punishments for some crimes

Utilitarian Punishment Aim towards the good society In order that instead of because of Two types of sanctions on criminals Internal, development of conscience External, established by laws providing penalties Laws can function at both levels Questions to ask about punishment Will future crimes be deterred? Will others in society be deterred from future crimes? Will society be protected?

Reform and Rehabilitation Imprisonment does not foster these Psychological treatment ineffective for other reasons Prisoners resent this No general standards Therapists have too much power Alternatives, release dates Inexact sciences

Attempts at Deterrence No proof that deters anyone else This is using a person as a means to an end, which may be immoral Possible to punish the wrong person Protection of society Should we allow criminals back into mainstream Some crimes will not be committed again, should they be punished Is utilitarian punishment really about punishment or social engineering?

Restitution Compensation for victims, justice only served if this is achieved Evolution of views on crime, now thought of mostly against the state Restitution to counter that Needs to be decided by judicial process Fits well with retributivist and utilitarian theories Problems May be no way to achieve restitution for some crimes Monetary form will be unjust Age of criminal plays a role Does not distinguish between intentional and unintentional harm

Synthesis Retributivism allows us to consider what is deserved Utilitarianism allows us modify punishment based on what is useful Restitution could help mediate both Synthesize four ways of distributing good and bad Start as equally as possible Then consider what is really needed Situation or context an important variable