In the intricate dance between the scientific and the metaphysical, the realms of quantum physics, biocentrism, and Indian philosophy converge, offering profound insights into the nature of reality. This article embarks on a journey to explore the interconnected threads that weave through these seemingly distinct domains, revealing a tapestry that challenges our understanding of existence.

Some scholars blame capitalism for the prevalence of modern slavery. However, data reveal that it is wrong to blame capitalism for a problem that long preceded it and would likely be much worse without it. We explain why this is the case.

We examine the role of alignment between organizational social consciousness and the informal and formal institutions of a country in increasing female representation on boards. Using fixed-effects and Hausman Taylor regression methodology for endogenous covariate with panel data for the years 2006–2020, we find that the greater the alignment between organizational social consciousness and certain formal and informal institutions, the more progress there is toward gender representation on corporate boards in Europe. We also find that more socially conscious firms make (...) the most progress, often going beyond the minimum regulatory targets. By showing the complementarity of these factors, we address the enduring question of how the interplay of formal and informal institutions directly affects corporate behavior, thus contributing to the institutional, public policy/regulatory, and corporate governance literatures. We note the need for policymakers to go beyond mere codification of rules via quotas and simultaneously work toward raising national and organizational social consciousness levels on issues of gender equality. (shrink)

Growing evidence, as presented by Jaswal & Akhtar, indicates that social motivation is not universally reduced in autism. Here, we evaluate and extend this argument in light of recent evidence of “compensation” in autism. We thereby argue that autistic “compensators” – exhibiting neurotypical behaviour despite persistent difficulties in social cognition – indicate intact or potentially heightened social motivation in autism.

This study investigates the impact of firms’ legacy institutional imprints on its engagement in corporate misconduct. We discover that a closed economic regime’s protectionist policies inscribe imprints in the form of opaque organizational routines and cause incumbent firms to develop competitive limitations. Utilizing the theoretical principles of the organizational imprinting theory, this research attests to the endurance of corruptive routines and argues that the degree of closed economy imprints increases firms’ engagement in income-increasing earnings management in the post-liberalization period. Furthermore, (...) we find that the impact of imprints is weakened by firms’ choices on international exposure and internal innovation. By utilizing the historical data on Indian economic policies from 1956 to 1991 and analyzing a sample of 18,432 firm-year observations for 2,396 listed Indian manufacturing firms from 1997 to 2007, we find support for our hypotheses. (shrink)

The way communicable diseases do spread from one person to another, depending upon the specific disease or causative infectious agent. Out of these diseases, some are incurable and the health care workers during their practice or otherwise acquire such infections and transmit them further to innocent patients who are unaware of about the health status of health care workers. The rights of an infected health care worker and patients are protected by many laws but in case of conflict of interests (...) between the individual right of the health care worker and life of a patient, then obviously by the principle of natural justice, saving the life of a person from such incurable infection gets the privilege. Therefore, there is a lot of ethical and professional dilemma, arising out, in such a type of scenario, irrespective of concealed or disclosed health status and the question mark is raised on whether clinical practice may be allowed in such cases. Some of the studies show the actual but very little risk of transmission from infected health care workers to patients. Therefore, in the current scenario, many western countries such as USA and UK are following different guidelines in this regard but the same is lacking in India. So, this article critically analyses the various issues arising out of it and thereby justifies the need to have a uniform infection control policy in this regard apart from legal and ethical binding on infected health care workers. (shrink)

These thirteen lectures on the 'punitive society,' delivered at the Collège de France in the first three months of 1973, examine the way in which the relations between justice and truth that govern modern penal law were forged, and question what links them to the emergence of a new punitive regime that still dominates contemporary society. Praise for Foucault's Lectures at the Collège de France Series “Ideas spark off nearly every page...The words may have been spoken in [the 1970s], but (...) they seem as alive and relevant as if they had been written yesterday.”—Bookforum “Foucault is quite central to our sense of where we are...[He] is carrying out, in the noblest way, the promiscuous aim of true culture.”—The Nation “[Foucault] has an alert and sensitive mind that can ignore the familiar surfaces of established intellectual coded and ask new questions...[He] gives dramatic quality to the movement of culture.”—The New York Review of Books. (shrink)

Many recent defenders of just war theory have denied that punishment is a just cause for war. Against this consensus, I argue that punishment is a just cause for war. To defend this claim, I appeal to recent work in social ontology and social epistemology (especially the work of Christian List and Philip Pettit) that shows that groups and not just individuals can be responsible for their actions. For this paper, I defend the thesis that an international treaty organization may (...) initiate a war against one of its member states for the purposes of punishing that member state. Many critics of punitive wars have taken the war itself to be the punishment, but I consider the war to be merely the means by which one brings an offending state to accept punitive terms. I show that punitive terms can achieve the three aims of punishment: retribution, deterrence, and reform. Finally, I respond to two objections: that no punitive war could be just because victims of aggression are never impartial in judging their aggressors and that widespread acceptance of the justice of punitive wars would return us to a more warlike and barbaric stage of human history. (shrink)

Restorative justice is highly promising as an effective approach to better supporting victims, reducing reoffending, and lowering costs. The challenge it faces is a dual hurdle of limited applicability and lack of public confidence. The issue is how we might better embed restorative justice in the criminal justice system so its promising effectiveness could be shared more widely while increasing public confidence. This chapter explores the new approach of punitive restoration, which gives more tools for restoration including a wider punitive (...) element. Its goal is to win support for greater use of restorative practices and a less punitive criminal justice system overall. (shrink)

The recent literature on social norms has stressed the centrality of emotions in explaining punishment and norm enforcement. This article discusses four negative emotions (righteous anger, indignation, contempt, and disgust) and examines their relationship to punitive behavior. I argue that righteous anger and indignation are both punitive emotions strictly speaking, but induce punishments of different intensity and have distinct elicitors. Contempt and disgust, for their part, cannot be straightforwardly considered punitive emotions, although they often blend with a colder form of (...) indignation to favor low-cost, indirect, and collective forms of punishment such as mockery, exclusion, and ostracism. (shrink)

Punitive damages and class actions can be viewed as sharing a common economic function - creating optimal deterrence. This is a function that these remedies can best pursue in different domains. When a tortfeasor causes harm that affects many victims, the preferred remedy is a class action. This is especially so when the amount of compensatory damages are high.There are scenarios, however, in which imposing punitive damages represents the best solution. We identify some of these scenarios to suggest the proper (...) domains of these two remedies. Finally, we identify situations where a combined use of these two remedies is desirable. We suggest that when the amount of losses suffered by victims is so small as to preclude a class action due to transaction costs and inactivity, it may nevertheless be useful to combine punitive damages with a class action. Punitive damages should be awarded within a class action if and only if there are frictions that could prevent the injured party from taking legal action. (shrink)

The use of punitive torture was practiced historically and has hardly been purged from our current practices. Fairly little attention has been paid to its justification, perhaps because many theorists of punishment have thought it so obviously unjust. But there is a fairly straightforward retributivist argument that punitive torture is sometimes morally justified: roughly, punitive torture is proportionate to the wrongdoing of some malefactors, such that, in the absence of overriding reasons, torturing them as punishment for their wrongdoing is morally (...) justified. However, Barry contends that the retributivist should strongly suspect that there will always be overriding reasons that defeat retributivist reasons that would otherwise justify punitive torture. And if even retributivism cannot justify punitive torture, it is doubtful that any justification is forthcoming. (shrink)

Over the past two decades, the United States has seen a dramatic increase in the number and magnitude of punitive damages verdicts rendered by juries in civil trials. Probably the most extraordinary example is the July 2000 award of $144.8 billion in the Florida class action lawsuit brought against cigarette manufacturers. Or consider two recent verdicts against the auto manufacturer BMW in Alabama. In identical cases, argued in the same court before the same judge, one jury awarded $4 million in (...) punitive damages, while the other awarded no punitive damages at all. In cases involving accidents, civil rights, and the environment, multimillion-dollar punitive awards have been a subject of intense controversy. But how do juries actually make decisions about punitive damages? To find out, the authors-experts in psychology, economics, and the law-present the results of controlled experiments with more than 600 mock juries involving the responses of more than 8,000 jury-eligible citizens. Although juries tended to agree in their moral judgments about the defendant's conduct, they rendered erratic and unpredictable dollar awards. The experiments also showed that instead of moderating juror verdicts, the process of jury deliberation produced a striking "severity shift" toward ever-higher awards. Jurors also tended to ignore instructions from the judges; were influenced by whatever amount the plaintiff happened to request; showed "hindsight bias," believing that what happened should have been foreseen; and penalized corporations that had based their decisions on careful cost-benefit analyses. While judges made many of the same errors, they performed better in some areas, suggesting that judges (or other specialists) may be better equipped than juries to decide punitive damages. Using a wealth of new experimental data, and offering a host of provocative findings, this book documents a wide range of systematic biases in jury behavior. It will be indispensable for anyone interested not only in punitive damages, but also jury behavior, psychology, and how people think about punishment. (shrink)

This chapter focuses on whether punishment can provide part of, or a complete, justification for going to war. The idea that war can be justified on punitive grounds has historic pedigree, and some leading just war theorists argue that punishment can contribute to the justification of war or justify war on its own. However, as the chapter demonstrates, these claims are underdeveloped in the literature. In the chapter a more considered view is developed. Drawing on a theory of punishment that (...) is based on remedial duties that wrongdoers have towards victims the chapter shows that, in principle, it is permissible to go to war in order to punish wrongdoers for reasons of general deterrence; that is, to deter others from wrongful actions. In practice, however, there are difficulties with a punitive justification of going to war: there may be insufficient protections for the innocent against being punished to warrant going to war for punitive reasons. (shrink)

Does private law punish? Should it? I question whether private law punishes in a form other than through a court order of punitive damages, by exploring a less obvious form of punishment to which less attention has been paid—‘punitive disentitlement’—wherein a person is disentitled from a legal right, defence, or other legal advantage they would and should otherwise be entitled to, because of their misconduct. Potential instances are identified and analysed in a broad survey of private law doctrine, including the (...) laws of property, contract, unjust enrichment and torts. The strongest reason for punitive disentitlement is its immunity to a powerful normative objection to punitive damages. Punitive disentitlement is not free from difficulties, however. It inherits some of the difficulties associated with punitive damages; it also runs into a separate set of objections. We should therefore be more alert to, and cautious about, its continued use. (shrink)

In order to address whether states can ever have the proper authority to militarily punish other international agents, I examine three attempts to justify punitive warfare from Augustine, Grotius and Locke for their relevance to both our contemporary international legal and political order and our contemporary security threats from sporadic terrorist or militant violence. Once a plausible model for a state’s valid authority to punish international agents is found, I will consider what punitive aims it can support and what challenges (...) such punitive warfare would have in satisfying the remaining jus ad bellum conditions. (shrink)

Michel Foucault’s idea of rationality does not refer to a universal criterion of reason as pure and neutral knowledge, but rather is understood in the plural, as «rationalities». His perspective functions as a regime of truth that not only produces new concepts and a historical organisation of observation, but also areas of regulation and political and technical intervention. Applied to the punitive economy, and by extension to the economy of power, punitive rationalities have enabled an unusual critical analysis of punishment (...) systems to flourish. This analysis is produced through different concepts, apparently usual, that reach an unusual radicality in the objectification of the networks of power/knowledge that spread beyond both the field of penal policy and that of rigid materialist explanations. And ultimately it has allowed a macro-social punitive order and macro-forms of domination to be constructed out of the diversity of micropower. (shrink)

While jurisprudence in the United States has been cast in the general mode of the English common law, modifications over time haveproduced enough significant variations that American law has a distinctive quality. To illustrate: The exclusionary rule in criminal cases prohibiting the use of evidence (even from reliable witnesses) acquired through illegal search, is not followed in Britain-or, for that matter, in Canada, Germany, and Israel. The punitive-damage concept (PD) in tort law is also a jurisprudential novelty. Punitive damages are (...) imposed in addition to compensatory awards given to tort victims to warn manufacturers and sellers to be careful in their safety and marketing practices. PDs are society's warning signals: Seller beware! Because they are one of society's ways to protect itself, PDs have recently been considered as fines which, to prevent excesses, should be under the rubric of the Eighth Amendment.This essay introduces new elements into the discussion on torts by hypothesizing (1) PDs are fines which belong to the public purse; (2) that expenditures from the public purse should be given to local organizations (like orphanages and inner-city hospitals) which provide vital services for those unable to pay; and (3) that the victim (or the victim's survivor) has a right to designate what local organizations should benefit from his or her punitive-damage awards.The hypotheses require reexamination of the concepts of citizenship, community, and work, respectively.Tort law is an integral part of the American law of injuries, a body of judicial doctrine and legislation and a set of legal arrangements that also include compensatron systems and safety legislation. It would have been unthinkable as recently as twenty-five years ago that the tort system would become a source of bitter contention. Today, however, it generates sharp rhetoric and dramatic proposals for change to address its contested problems, as well as strong views in favor of continuing the system essentially intact so as not to disturb its contended benefits. (shrink)

On December 20, 2002, the Ohio Supreme Court issued an opinion in Dardinger v. Anthem Blue Cross & Blue Shield granting a landmark punitive damages award against the defendant-insurer for breach of contract and bad faith in its coverage of a cancer patient. The court directed that the punitive damages award of $30 million, should it be accepted by the plaintiff, be apportioned between the plaintiff and a cancer research fund to be established in the name of the plaintiff's deceased (...) wife, Esther Dardinger. In so doing, the court broke new ground in the scope and social purpose of punitive damages in health care litigation, as well as the courts’ role in distributing those damages.After being diagnosed with metastatic brain tumors in October 1996, Esther began intra-arterial chemotherapy treatments at the recommendation of her physician, Dr. Newton. IAC is a targeted form of chemotherapy in which an arterial catheter is threaded through a cranial artery near the tumor and into the brain. (shrink)

The notion of justice is broad and complex. When we pursue justice too harshly after a conflict, we create new injustice and more victims; when we do not, the offenders usually keep hurting others and the violence is prolonged. As a matter of fact, only a few perpetrators can be punished. On the other hand, does punishment of the offender alone heal the victim or restore peace and harmony in society? Moreover, when the victim forgives, should the society still punish (...) the offender? What role do truth recovery, state tribute (paid to the victims) and monetary compensation play in finding the balance between punitive justice and restorative justice? This paper takes up these issues of justice and, while discussing certain aspects of the relationship between punitive justice and restorative justice in some processes of social (national) reconciliation, tries to present some answers. (shrink)

This article responds to Jeffrey Perl's argument that, while there is a “paradigm shift” at Ise every twenty years, when the enshrined deity Amaterasu “shifts” from the current site to an adjacent one during the rite of shikinen sengū, the Jingū paradigm itself never changes and never ages. The author confirms Perl's conclusion by examining the politicized scholarship, written since the 1970s, maintaining that Shinto is a faux religion, invented prior to World War II as a means of unifying Japan (...) behind government policies of ultranationalism and international expansion. This article shows, instead, how emperors—who are not political but religious figures in Japan—and the Jingū priesthood have acted together over the past thirteen hundred years to sustain the imperial shrine at Ise and its ancient rites. The so-called Meiji Restoration actually continued an imperial policy of restoring and intensifying the observance of Shinto rituals that were threatened by neglect. Meiji intervened personally in 1889 to ensure the continuity of hikyoku, an unvoiced and secret serenade to Amaterasu, by extending its venue from the imperial palace shrine to performance at Jingū as well. The author's archival and ethnographic research at Ise and in the National Archives shows how the arguments that Shinto is a modern invention are punitive rather than dispassionately historical. (shrink)

Criminal justice policy faces the twin challenges of improving our crime reduction efforts while increasing public confidence. These challenges are exacerbated by the fact that at least some measur...

Many philosophers think that punishment is intentionally harmful and that this makes it especially hard to morally justify. Explanations for the latter intuition often say questionable things about the moral significance of the intent to harm. I argue that there’s a better way to explain this intuition.

In this narrative, we explore the story of Ananias and Sapphira from the book of Acts in the Christian scriptures. We examine the story in the light of a recent book by Dominic Johnson, God Is Watching You, and other related research. The idea of a punitive God and/or the belief in a punitive God may have significant effects on group functioning. The troubling story of Ananias and Sapphira may be seen as a central cog in the cooperative coming together (...) of what became the Christian Church. In our modern world, a punitive God is an idea we seek to avoid but it may be the one that is essential for a peaceful cooperative world. (shrink)

Most punishment theorists seem to accept the following claim: punishment is intended to harm the punishee. A significant minority of punishment theorists reject the claim, though. I defend the claim from objections, focusing mostly on recent objections that haven’t gotten much attention. My objective is to reinforce the already strong case for the intentions claim. I first clarify what advocates of the intentions claim mean by it and state the standard argument for it. Then I critically discuss a wide variety (...) of objections to the claim and to the standard argument for it. (shrink)

This paper engages with dialectical critical realism to reflect on the problems and limitations regarding our contemporary justice practices and understandings. Our starting point is the idea that contemporary approaches to justice in liberal democratic settings are predominantly hostile; they are overly focused on episodic injustices, and dominant forms of addressing these injustices are pervaded with punitive logics. This pathological character of contemporary justice is linked to how it is socially experienced, imagined and reproduced as an absent presence: something that (...) is already ‘there’, taken for granted, and only relevant when it is seen to be violated. Against this, we argue that concrete justice is mostly lacking in our social world, and that to tackle this lack, we need to reimagine and re-experience justice as a present absence. The paper then suggests that this alternative, lived sense of justice can be pursued through an engagement with the dialectics of belonging. (shrink)

This paper presents the main theses of what in recent years I have analyzed under the concept of punitive populism, seen as a complex phenomenon that conflates penal policy with politics, criminology and even moralism in social media. Thus, in order to present my critical outlines, I offer in the second section a definition of punitive populism, while in the third section I explore its relationship with media criminology, in order to, in the fourth section, develop my ideas on punitive (...) populism and moralism in social networks. In the fifth section I expose the legislative and penal consequences of punitive populism and, finally, in the sixth section, I present a normative proposal to reduce the effects of punitive populism. (shrink)

A growing body of literature has examined managers’ use of restorative practices in the workplace. However, little is currently known about why managers use restorative practices as opposed to alternative responses. We employed a qualitative interview technique to develop an inductive model of managers’ restorative versus punitive response in the context of employee wrongdoing. The findings reveal a set of key motivating and moderating influences on the manager’s decision to respond to wrongdoing in a restorative versus punitive manner. The findings (...) also suggest that managers’ personal needs and perceived duties in the aftermath of employee wrongdoing are generally more consistent with restorative responses than punishment responses, which helps explain managers’ use of restorative workplace practices. (shrink)

Abstract Building on the authors' previous work regarding the classical Confucian position on the legitimate use of military force as represented by Mencius and Xunzi, this paper probes their understanding of punitive expeditions undertaken against tyrants in particular ? aims, justification, preconditions, and limits. It compares this understanding with contemporary Western models of humanitarian intervention, and argues that the Confucian punitive expedition aligns most closely with the emerging ?responsibility to protect? model in Western discussions, although it also differs from the (...) latter in certain respects. For example, the Confucian expedition explicitly forwards as legitimate aims regime change and the punishment of tyrants, in addition to rescue of an abused population and assistance in rebuilding a decent society. The Confucian understanding also appears to set a lower threshold standard (well short of genocide, ethnic cleansing, or large-scale massacre) for what counts as severe tyranny warranting intervention, and it explicitly speaks of an obligation (beyond mere permissibility) to intervene when that threshold is exceeded. In its concluding section, the paper discusses some possible contemporary implications of the classical Confucian understanding of a punitive expedition against tyrants. (shrink)

The system of punitive damages is a special system of civil damages under the U.S. legal system, which is quite different from the system of compensatory damages. Punitive damages are paid in excess of the plaintiff’s actual injuries and are intended to punish and deter serious infringement. Yet, it has always been a controversial system under the common law legal system since it may challenge the constitutionality and it allows excessive compensation. Although it has produced certain influences on the civil (...) law legal system, all these influences are limited in theoretical discussions, and it has not been widely recognized by those countries since they apply the principle of parity compensation in the area of civil damages. (shrink)

Restorative justice approaches offer a promising alternative to formal sentencing. Victims are more satisfied, reoffending is less and at reduced costs. However, these findings are limited in scale and application that confine these approaches to relatively few cases that restrict their potential. I argue for a fundamental revision called punitive restoration that permits otherwise forbidden options like hard treatment. Punitive restoration can justify their use where they can best enable the restoration of rights for offenders in light of their circumstances (...) as a means of fulfilling the aim of restoration instead of penal abolition. (shrink)

The creation of ad hoc international penal tribunals and of a permanent international penal court symbolizes the will to extend penal law from the national state to international relations, thus giving rise to the concept of a punitive intervention. This contribution seeks to establish whether this extension of penal law to international relations should be strictly modeled on national penal law or whether it should follow a paradigm of its own. This could well be the same paradigm, which some authors (...) have suggested for the national level, i. e. the paradigm of reconstructive justice. Though it does not radically exclude the penal dimension of justice, reconstructive justice nevertheless relativizes this dimension, thus leaving room for a more constructive reaction to crime. (shrink)

"L’organisation d’une pénalité d’enfermement n’est pas simplement récente, elle est énigmatique. Qu’est-ce qui pénètre dans la prison? En tout cas, pas la loi. Que fabrique-t-elle? Une communauté d’ennemis intérieurs". C’est en ces termes que Michel Foucault dénonce, dans ce cours prononcé en 1973, et que viendra compléter, en 1975, son ouvrage Surveiller et punir, le "cercle carcéral". La Société punitive étudie ainsi comment les sociétés traitent les individus ou les groupes dont elles souhaitent se débarrasser, c’est-à-dire les tactiques punitives, mais (...) aussi la prise de pouvoir sur le corps et sur le temps et l’instauration du couple pénalité-délinquance. Michel Foucault retrace l'histoire des "tactiques fines de la sanction" dont il distingue quatre modalités : exiler ; imposer un rachat ; marquer ; enfermer. C'est dans la seconde moitié du XVIIIe siècle que se développe une "science des prisons" à fonction corrective et que se construit un discours sur le criminel et son traitement possible, donnant naissance à un schéma de société qui vise à l’absolu du contrôle et de la surveillance. L’ajustement entre le système judiciaire et le mécanisme de surveillance (l’organisation d’une police), entre l’émergence de la richesse et la pratique des illégalismes, entre la force corporelle de l’ouvrier et l’appareil de production s’accomplit ensuite au tournant du XIXe siècle. Foucault démontre donc que ce sont les instances de contrôle para-pénal du XVIIe et du XVIIIe siècle qui ont abouti, in fine, au fonctionnement de la prison, visant à l’élimination du désordre, au contrôle de la distribution spatiale des individus, de leur emplacement par rapport à l’appareil productif. La Société punitive finit par poser la question, cruciale aux yeux du philosophe, de la validité intrinsèque de la loi pénale. A-t-elle vocation universelle ou se limite-t-elle à la douteuse applicabilité d’une somme de décrets? (shrink)

The article discusses retributive justice and punitive restraint in response to the worst types of crime. I take the Breivik Case as a starting point. Anders Behring Breivik was sentenced to 21 years of preventive detention for killing 69 people, mainly youths, at Utøya and 8 people in Oslo on July 22nd, 2011. Retributivist theories as well as commonly held retributive intuitions suggest that much harsher punishment is required for such crimes. According to some retributivist theories, most notably on the (...) influential theories of Kant and Hegel, the death penalty is warranted for murderers like Breivik. This suggests that the rationale for punitive restraint in a case like the Breivik Case can only be found in forward- looking, consequentialist theories of punishment, or by adding to retributivist theories a side-constraint in the form of a principle of parsimony. However, I argue that if we look closer at the function of punishment in the retributivist theories of Kant and Hegel, they too imply a rationale for punitive restraint, even for such horrific crimes as here discussed. Against Kant and Hegel’s own views on the death penalty, I argue that their broader “freedom theories” of retributive justice do not imply the justice of the death penalty or life imprisonment. In the last part of the article, I explore differences in the concepts of freedom entailed by Kant and Hegel’s theories, and I relate these to some of the background factors relevant to the Breivik Case. (shrink)

In this paper, we offer a defense of non-punitive measures as morally justified responses to crime within a framework of society as a fair system of cooperation among free and equal individuals. Our argument proceeds in three steps. First, we elaborate on the premises of our argument: we situate criminal acts within a model of society as a fair system of cooperation, identify the types of unfair disadvantages crimes bring about, and consider the social aim of the criminal justice system. (...) Next, we reject the claim defended by fair-play retributivists that fairness considerations make punishment a necessary response to criminal acts. In the last step, we demonstrate that it is rather non-punitive responses to crime that are warranted under the principle of fairness and, as such, are morally justified. We conclude the paper by rejecting two possible objections to our defense: the “responsibility gap” and the “victims’ claim to justice” objections. (shrink)

Punishment involves the intentional infliction of harm and suffering. Both of the most prominent families of justifications of punishment – retributivism and consequentialism – face several moral concerns that are hard to overcome. Moreover, the effectiveness of current criminal punishment methods in ensuring society’s safety is seriously undermined by empirical research. Thus, it appears to be a moral imperative for a modern and humane society to seek alternative means of administering justice. The special issue of Diametros “The Abolition of Punishment: (...) Is a Non-Punitive Criminal Justice System Ethically Justified?” was brought into life precisely to give the authors a platform for such progressive inquiries. And it is now safe to say that this platform has been put to excellent use, since Valerij Zisman, Alexander Stachurski, Giorgia Brucato, Perica Jovchevski, Sofia M. I. Jeppsson, Stephen G. Morris, Benjamin Vilhauer, John Lemos, Saul Smilansky, Elizabeth Shaw, Mirko Farina, Andrea Lavazza and Sergei Levin have presented such thought-provoking texts that they are bound to set the stage for debate in the years to come. This article is an introduction to this special issue and to the authors’ papers. (shrink)

This paper critically examines our relationship with justice in contemporary western liberal settings, with a particular focus on why our pursuit of justice is intimately entangled with punitive logics. It does so by defining this approach to justice as predominantly pathological, in the sense that it follows a logic that is akin to that displayed in our contemporary sensibilities regarding bodily pain. We deploy the concept of ‘dys-appearance’ used by Drew Leder in the context of his theory of embodiment to (...) discuss how, in western liberal societies, justice is primarily experienced and paid attention to when it appears negatively as a phenomenon; that is, we only become conscious of justice in our lived experiences through the painful and episodic experience of injustice. This phenomenological quality of justice, we argue, is intrinsically linked to how the pursuit of justice in these settings predominantly takes a hostile, punitive aspect. (shrink)

In the past two decades, scholars in China and beyond have vigorously demonstrated that the just war discourse is integral to classical Confucianism and that the classical Confucian idea of “punitive expedition” can be best understood in terms of humanitarian intervention. The sceptics, however, claim that in describing the ancient sage‐king's bloodless punitive expeditions, what classical Confucians really had in mind was not so much to endorse morally justified forms of aggressive war but to highlight the paramount importance of the (...) ruler's moral self‐cultivation and benevolent government. This paper examines closely the disagreement between the two positions and offers a more historically grounded justification for the just war interpretation of classical Confucianism. It pays special attention to the importance of ritual order in classical Confucian political theory and discusses how the Warring States political circumstances led thinkers such as Mencius and Xunzi to shift their attention from ritual order to the well‐being of the people. (shrink)