Punishment as retribution (original) (raw)

Abstract

The article is concerned with punishment as retribution. A number of reasonable assumptions concerning the punishment of criminals as well as the punishment of innocent individuals are made. These assumptions are consistent and from them a comprehensive ‘justice map’ is drawn. Several implications concerning justice are derived and there is an analysis as to where slack in the pursuit of justice is most likely to occur. It is then shown that all of the assumptions and consequently all the results can be derived from a simple utility maximization model. Throughout the paper, behavior consistent with the concept of retribution is presented and there is some comparison to other theories of punishment. More generally, the article can be seen as a building of a social welfare function. In contrast to other work on social welfare functions which begin with just methods of aggregating preferences, this article begins with just preferences.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliography

• Aristoteles, The Nicomachean Ethics (transl. by David Rose), London 1959.
• Armstrong, K. G., ‘The Retributivist Hits Back’, Mind 70 (1961) 471–490.
  Google Scholar
• Arrow, K., Social Choice and Individual Values, New York, Second Edition, 1963.
• Becker, G., ‘Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach’, Journal of Political Economy 76 (1968) 169–217.
  Google Scholar
• Cyert, R. and March, J., A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs 1963.
• Harris, J. R., ‘On the Economics of Law and Order’, Journal of Political Economy 78 (1970) 165–174.
  Google Scholar
• Hart, H. L. A., Punishment and Responsibility, Oxford 1968.
• Landes, W., ‘An Economic Analysis of the Courts’, Journal of Law and Economics (1971) 61–107.
• Lewis, C. S., ‘The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment’, Twentieth Century (1949).
• Lipsey, R. G. and Lancaster, K., ‘The General Theory of the Second Best’, Review of Economic Studies 24 (1956) 11–32.
  Google Scholar
• Mabbott, J. D., ‘Punishment’, Mind 49 (1939) 152–167.
  Google Scholar
• Mundle, C. W. K., ‘Punishment and Desert’, Philosophical Quarterly 4 (1954) 216–228.
  Google Scholar
• Posner, R. A., ‘An Economic Approach to Procedure’, Journal of Legal Studies 2 (1973).
• Stigler, G. J., ‘The Optimum Enforcement of Laws’, Journal of Political Economy 78 (1970) 526–536.
  Google Scholar
• Thurow, L., ‘Equity vs. Efficiency in Law Enforcement’, Public Policy (1970) 451–462.
• Tullock, G., The Logic of the Law, New York 1971.
• Virginia Law Review 53 (1967). ‘Jury Sentencing in Virginia’, 968–974.
• Wittman, D., ‘Two Views of Procedure’, Journal of Legal Studies 3 (1974).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Economics, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA
   Donald Wittman

Authors

1. Donald Wittman
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

I would like to thank David Kaun and Richard Posner for their comments.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wittman, D. Punishment as retribution.Theor Decis 4, 209–237 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136647

Download citation

• Issue Date: February 1974
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136647

Keywords