This analysis rejects retributivism and consequentialism in favor of expressivism, indicating its unique advantages.
In Punishment for the Greater Good, Adam Kolber defends consequentialism as a better justification for punishment than retributivism. Here, we reject the dichotomy and seek to motivate expressivism as a genuine alternative. According to expressivism, what justifies punishment is its expression of a fitting message. We show how expressivism can be developed to avoid Kolber's objections to retributivism, while having a number of advantages over his preferred consequentialism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ryu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: