English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113303/144284 (79%)
Visitors : 50798366      Online Users : 807
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 文學院 > 哲學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/147262
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/147262


    Title: 戴維斯的應報主義探究
    On Michael Davis’s Retributivism
    Authors: 鄭媁薷
    Cheng, Wei-Ju
    Contributors: 鄭光明
    Cheng, Kuang-Ming
    鄭媁薷
    Cheng, Wei-Ju
    Keywords: 刑罰
    應報主義
    效益主義
    應報主義之尺
    比例原則
    Punishment
    Retributivism
    Utilitarianism
    Retributivist ruler
    Lex talionis
    Date: 2023
    Issue Date: 2023-09-01 16:19:22 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 關於「刑罰是否在道德上站得住腳 (morally justified)」此一問題,最著名的討論為應報主義(retributivism)與效益主義(utilitarianism)兩大主張。傳統贊成刑罰的論證多以應報主義為立論基礎,而效益主義雖同樣支持刑罰,但其支持的理由卻與應報主義大相逕庭。

    本篇論文礙於篇幅,無法處理所有的應報主義,而係將重點聚焦於當代英美法哲學家Michael Davis對於應報主義的刑罰主張,深入探討應報主義的刑罰理論基礎並釐清相關問題。

    筆者將在本文指出「刑罰之正當性基礎」應是應報主義與效益主義共同面臨的問題,而其中以「公平遊戲論」作為應報主義的正當性基礎,相較其他類型之應報主義更為言之成理。此外,Michael Davis為了證明刑罰能透過單純應報主義證成,試圖提出應報主義七步驟之理論,以及犯罪許可證交易市場的思想實驗。我也將在本文中主張Davis的理論與思想實驗有哪些問題,一一指出問題點並提出筆者的見解。

    最後,儘管應報主義是義務論所衍生而出的理論,但筆者認為,應報主義的理論內部存在「應報主義之尺」的問題暫無法解決, Davis的思想實驗亦未能解決該等問題,且其思想實驗若要能夠實際運作,仍可能需帶入效益主義。
    Reference: 許家馨(2014)。應報即復仇?-當代應報理論及其對死刑之意涵初探。中研院法學期刊,(15),207–282。
    Bedau, Hugo Adam.(1978). “Retribution and the Theory of Punishment,” Journal of Philosophy, 75: 601–620.
    Bedau, Hugo Adam. (2017). Punishment. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Archive. https://plato.stanford.edu/Archives/Win2017/entries/punishment/
    Benn, S.I.(1967). “Punishment" in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 7. ed. Paul. Edwards, 8 vols. London: Macmillan Publishers; New York: Free Press.
    Bentham , Jeremy(1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation . Oxford: Clarendon Press
    Cottingham, John (1979). Varieties of Retribution. Philosophical Quarterly, 29, 116: 238-246.
    Bentham, Jeremy.(1823). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London: W. Pickering, and R. Wilson.
    Dagger, Richard.(1993).Playing Fair with Punishment, Ethics, Vol. 103, No. 3(pp.473-488).
    Davis, Michael.(1983). “How to Make the Punishment Fit the Crime.” Ethics. Vol. 93, No. 4(pp.726-752).
    Davis, Michael.(1992). To Make the Punishment Fit the Crime: Essays in the Theory of Criminal Justice. Boulder, CO: Westview.
    Davis, Michael.(1996). Justice in the Shadow of Death; Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc.
    Dolinko, David.(1994). ”Mismeasuring "Unfair Advantage": A Response to Michael Davis” Law and Philosophy. Vol. 13, No. 4(pp. 493-524).
    Fingarette, Herbert. (1978). “Punishment and Suffering,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association, 50: 499–525.
    Hart, H.L.A.(1969).“The Presidential Address: Prolegomenon to the Principles of Punishment.” in Punishment and Responsibility. Oxford University Press.
    Kramer, Matthew H.(2011). “Retributivism in the Spirit of Finnis.” in University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 43(pp.167-185).
    Moore, Michael S.(1987). “The Moral Worth of Retribution,” in Ferdinand Schoeman(ed.), Responsibility, Character, and the Emotions: New Essays in Moral Psychology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Fingarette , Herbert .(1977)Punishment and Suffering. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol. 50, No. 6 (pp. 499-525).
    Mill, John Stuart.(1950). On Bentham and Coleridge. New York: Harper & Brothers.
    Morris, Herbert(1968). Persons and Punishment. The Monist, Vol 52, Issue 4(pp.475-501).
    Pincoffs, Edmund.(1977). Are Questions of Desert Decidable? In J. B. Cederblom and William Blizek(eds.), Justice and Punishment(pp. 75–88). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
    Primoratz, Igor.(1989). Justifying Legal Punishment, Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.
    Rachels, James.(2003). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. 4th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
    Scheid, Don E.(1983). Kant’s Retributivism. Ethics. Vol. 93, No. 2(pp. 262-282).
    Scheid, Don E.(1995). Davis, Unfair Advantage Theory, and Criminal Desert. Law and Philosophy, Vol. 14, No. 3/4(pp. 375-409).
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    哲學系
    106154001
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106154001
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    400101.pdf1477KbAdobe PDF295View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback