Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
41
CHAPTER 7 – REWARD AND PUNISHMENT
General Overview
If we can be held morally responsible then apportioning rewards and punishments seems
appropriate. Who rewards or punishes and the kinds and types of reward and punishment that
might be thought appropriate are the concern of this chapter. Therefore the concept of justice is
crucial and the main forms of justice are introduced and explicated. In addition, because the
concept of rights lies at the bedrock of problems of justice, a section on human rights has been
added to this chapter.
Class Suggestions
Again, much of the material in this chapter is rich and can be explored through a diverse range of
activities, debates, presentations, group projects, etc. Simple examples to start off discussion
might be whether basketball players should receive million dollar salaries while teachers earn…
Does Bill Gates really deserve all of that wealth? In fact, is any one person entitled to more
personal wealth than that of some countries? What would be an appropriate punishment for Mr.
Smith who stole the life-saving drugs because he couldn’t afford them, etc.? The issues of
affirmative action and capital punishment are almost always in the news, and a debate style class
or mini-project on one of these can be fruitful. Getting students working on particular cases will
give them a taste of this style of analysis and prepare them for some of the cases to come later in
the text. Material in this chapter connects with work done in previous chapters and instructors
may want to emphasize these connections, going over previous material and demonstrating how
it’s relevant here.
Chapter Summary
Definition of Key Terms
Reward and Punishment in Relationship to Justice
Reward and punishment will be discussed in the context of justice.
Elements of Justice
Several elements of justice apply to reward and punishment.
What Justice Involves
How should we distribute justice, i.e. good and bad, right and wrong, reward and punishment on
a just and fair basis?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
42
Concern with Past Events
Justice is concerned with the past, what has been done rather than what might or perhaps will be
done. Rewards and punishments, of course, affect the future.
Individualistic Rather Than Collectivistic
Individuals rather than groups are punished or rewarded. Punishing groups can lead to injustice.
Comparative Justice
Deals with comparisons of treatment in terms of rewards and punishment.
Reward
Rewards can be distributed in four ways:
1. Equally without regard to ability or merit
2. According to ability
3. According to merit or desert
4. According to needs
Criteria for Rewarding People
Egalitarian Criterion or Equal Distribution of Goods and Rewards:
Equal distribution without regard to ability or merit. Example of Swedish hospital and kidney
dialysis. How to decide who gets dialysis when need surpasses ability to provide. What criteria
are applicable? Is a lottery the most fair and ethical means of deciding?
Problems with Equality of Distribution:
Egalitarian method ignores merit, ability, need, etc. Should those with differing aptitudes, skills,
and/or abilities be treated the same? Equality of consideration if they have other attributes – race,
sex, religion, age, handicap – to what extent are these important factors? Are people really equal?
Production, or What People Produce:
Quality and/or quality production as criteria for reward. Those who produce better or more
should be rewarded accordingly.
Effort:
Reward effort regardless of quality or quantities of work. How do you reward effort?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
43
Ability:
Natural ability. Should people be rewarded for simply having ability for which they have had no
responsibility? How should acquired ability be rewarded? Should those with ability be rewarded
even if they choose to not utilize their abilities?
Need:
Rewards based on need.
Private need – what individuals need as a result of poverty. What should be given? Money, jobs,
scholarships? Consider the latter. Should the brightest or the neediest get the scholarship? Does
reward in terms of need eliminate incentive? Is rewarding those in need fair to those who are
talented and hardworking?
Public need – Reward based on fulfilling public need. Should a basketball player receive greater
rewards than a nurse?
Other Criteria:
1. Long and expensive training including profession
2. Job or profession requiring expensive equipment
3. Physical danger
4. Unpleasantness of job
5. Seniority
Theories of How to Reward
Two main theories deal with how to reward (and punish):
1. Retributivism (just deserts)
2. Utilitarianism (results)
Retributivism
People deserve rewards (or punishments) for what they have done not for what the consequences
of what they have done may be. What they have done is primarily assessed in terms of effort.
Utilitarianism
Chapter 2 showed that utilitarianism is based on good consequences for everyone affected by
acts or rules. Reward only on the basis of bringing this about. Does this tend to reward results,
not hard work or desert? Could reward an undeserving person simply because to do so may bring
good results.
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
44
John Rawls and his Theory of Justice
John Rawls (1921-2002) is another prominent nonconsequentialist, especially his “Theory of
Justice.”
Natural Rights versus Rights of a Just Society
In the tradition from Locke to Nozick, human rights have been seen as natural rights. The
American Declaration of Independence was founded on this principle. Where do these natural
rights come from?
For Rawls, rights are given through a “just society.” A “just society” is founded on those
principles that we would agree to from behind a “veil of ignorance.”
Two basic principles according to Rawls would be adopted:
1. Equality principle – equal rights to maximum liberty.
2. Difference principle–inequality is acceptable if everyone benefits and has equal opportunity
to receive such benefits.
These principles together would create a just society for Rawls and ought to be accepted given
that no one will know in advance how the principles will work out for them.
Difference between Rawls and Nozick
Rawls is liberal, while Nozick is libertarian. For Nozick, liberty is the good that society ought to
protect. For Rawls, society needs to protect a range of goods. For Rawls, ultimately wealth
belongs to society. For Nozick, it belongs to individuals.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Rawls’ Theory
1. Fits with ideals of liberal capitalism: individual freedoms, equitable distribution of wealth.
2. Is a “veil of ignorance” possible?
3. Is Rawls’ theory any better than its competitors?
Punishment
Moral or legal punishment usually involved four elements:
1. It must involve unpleasantness.
2. Punishment must be given or done for some thing.
3. It should be imposed or given by those with requisite authority.
4. It must be imposed according to laws or rules violated by offender.
Justice perhaps best served by law rather than private individuals for two reasons:
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
45
1. Private punishment looks more like vengeance than justice.
2. Public punishment more amenable to justice being carried out.
Theories of Punishment
Retributive, or Deserts, Theory
Punishment only when it is deserved not in order to accomplish anything, such as deter. Imposed
because of a crime committed not a social good to be achieved.
Why Crime Requires Punishment:
Two reasons:
1. Re-establish balance of morality – “scale of justice.”
2. Eliminate or set right advantages achieved to wrong doers.
Problems with Determining Desert:
How to match crime to punishment. Desert theory need not consider mercy or forgiveness.
Should a crime committed a lifetime ago be punished equally with the same crime committed
yesterday? Should a “mercy killing” be punished equally with a cold-blooded murder?
Problem of Mercy:
Should mercy be shown to criminals? To all, some, none? Should retributivists stick solely to the
idea that punishment is based on desert?
Problem of Determining Seriousness of Offenses and Punishment:
What are the most serious offenses and punishments? In some cultures stealing is punished with
death or hands are cut off. What offenses deserve what punishments?
“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’:
1. Mirror-image theory: punishment mirrors crime.
2. Punishment should be suitable, appropriate for the crime.
Utilitarian, or Results Theory
Punishment is future oriented – looks to consequences/results.
Two sanctions:
1. Internal – directed to conscience, guilt, shame.
2. External – laws or penalties imposed.
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
46
These sanctions are justified by the good consequences or results they bring about. If punishment
rates better than some other practice, then justified.
Consequences for the Offender:
Should punishment bring about good consequence for offender? Aim at rehabilitation or reform.
Can and should offenders be treated?
Consequences for Potential Offender –Deterrence:
Does punishment deter?
1. No real evidence that punishment deters.
2. Using criminal as “means to an end.”
3. If punishment deters then works with innocent as well as guilty.
Effects on Society at Large–Protection:
How effective is punishment in protecting society in the long run? Would other means serve us
better?
Problem with Justice:
For the utilitarian, punishment is justified by utilizing justice. Aims more at social engineering.
Restitution, or Compensation for Victims, Theory
Justice is served only if victims are compensated.
Crime against the State, Not the Individual:
Is crime a violation of the individual or state? Compensation necessary for individual to
counteract crime against state. Restitution fits quite well with our other two main theories.
Problems with Restitution:
1. How much restitution is sufficient?
2. Should rich criminals pay more than poor ones?
3. Can old or sick criminals be expected to compensate their victims?
4. Does not distinguish between intentional and unintentional injury or harm.
Is a Synthesis Possible?
Could a synthesis of the three theories work?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
47
Retributivism – desert or merit as reward but not exclusively. Innocent should not be punished
and punishment “fit the crime.”
Utilitarianism – modify or moderate rewards or punishments according to usefulness, especially
those that seem harsh or unfair.
Restitution – compensation can bring about good consequences to the most deserving of victims.
Some Other Possibilities for the Distribution of Goods or Rewards
Distribute goods equitably in terms of need and moderate according to desert, or merit, or ability,
or as a result of productivity, effort, etc.
Conclusion
A synthetic approach appears best for both reward and punishment without losing sight of need
and the egalitarian approach.
KEY TERMS AND CONCEPTS
Reward
Punishment
Justice
Retributive justice
Desert
Distributive Justice
Results
Restitutive Justice
Compensation
Egalitarian
Equality
Need
Production
Effort
Ability
Deterrence
ESSAY QUESTIONS
1. Analyze the two main theories of how to reward. Which is the best, and why?
2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the utilitarian theories of punishment?
3. Retributivism justifies punishment on the basis of desert. What are the advantages and
disadvantages of this approach?
4. Is restitution a plausible way of punishing? Explain any difficulties with this view and
advantages.
5. Is a synthesis of these theories possible? Discuss with reference to all of the models
introduced in this chapter.
6. Outline John Rawls’ theory of justice. How would you critique it?
TRUE/FALSE
1. How we dispense good or bad, reward and punishment, is called distributive justice.
2. Justice is concerned with the future – what people will do.
3. Justice should be collective rather than individual.
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
48
4 There is only one way of distributing rewards.
5. The retributivist believes that the results are what really count.
6. All that counts for the utilitarians is whether rewards or punishments are deserved.
7. John Rawls believes that human rights are natural rights.
8. Restitution is the idea that punishment should be stopped or “rested.”
9. One of the weaknesses of deterrence theories is that if they work they work just as well on
the innocent as well as the guilty.
10. Someone who synthesizes all the theories of rewards and punishments together is known as a
nephrologist.
MULTIPLE CHOICE
11. As a __________ you would allocate rewards and punishments based on results.
a) Libertarian
b) Republican
c) Utilitarian
d) Kantian
12. “An eye for an eye” fits with a(n) __________ theory of punishment.
a) utilitarian
b) conservative
c) retributivist
d) distributivist
13. Why, according to the retributivists, should people be punished?
a) revenge
b) utility
c) deterrence
d) desert
14. As an egalitarian you would distribute rewards
a) on need.
b) on ability.
c) on merit.
d) equally without regard for need or merit.
15. The theory of deterrence is a __________ theory.
a) desert
b) results
c) restitution
d) compensation
16. Who proposed the theory of a “just society”?
a) Aristotle
b) Robert Nozick
c) George Bush
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. All rights reserved
49
d) John Rawls
17. Who believed that offenders should be punished only if they deserve it and not for any
consequences that may come of it?
a) Mill
b) Bentham
c) Kant
d) Sidgewick
18. Who have been accused of thinking of punishment in terms of use rather than justice?
a) The retributivists
b) The Utilitarians
c) The Quakers
d) The restitutionists
19. Restitution theories believe that when a crime is committed a victim should
a) seek compensation.
b) seek revenge.
c) seek help.
d) seek punishment.
20. What kind of case presents difficulties for all the theories of punishment?
a) Where harm occurs but the people causing it are clearly irresponsible.
b) Where harm occurs but the people causing it are really without fault.
c) Where harm does not occur but could if people were slightly more unlucky.
d) Where harm does occur but the people causing it cannot be caught.
Answer Key to Chapter 7 Test Questions
True or False: Multiple Choice:
