Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
JUSTICE THEORY FALL 2009 Michael J. Willey
Lecture Roadmap <ul><li>Describe the theoretical framework and critiques of  Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian perspectiv...
Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Jeremy Bentham (Key Architect of Utilitarian Theory of J...
Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Emphasized a hedonistic (felicity calculus) approa...
Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Bentham also advocated for justice to be abandoned...
Critiques of Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice  <ul><li>Some critiques of Utilitarianism is that t...
Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Robert Nozick promoted the theory of Retributive Justice ...
Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Nozick holds that “retribution is always done for a...
Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Stresses that there are essential differences betwe...
Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Retribution </li></ul><ul><li>Is done for a wrong <...
Critiques of Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Find that retributive justice has no substan...
Howard Becker and the Labeling  Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Developed the Labeling Theory </li></ul><ul><li>Deviance is...
Howard Becker and the Labeling  Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>“ Social groups create deviance by making the rules w...
Howard Becker and the Labeling  Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Variations on how a society will deem an act “deviant...
Howard Becker and the Labeling  Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>When ones are finally labeled deviants by a society: ...
Critiques of Howard Becker and the Labeling  Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Some critics focus on the fact that Beck...
Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice
Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice <ul><li>Utilitarian </li></ul><ul><li>Emph...
Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice Cont: <ul><li>Labeling Theory </li></ul><u...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood <ul><li>13 Miltirary and Civilian Personnel Killed. </li></ul><ul><li>30 Wounded </li></ul><ul><l...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>The Shooting at Fort Hood was conducted by a man named Nidal Hasan.  A 39 Year-Old ...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Retributive Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>All wrong acts must be ...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Labeling Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Society deems such acts of...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Faults with Retributive Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Does not ef...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Faults with Labeling Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Does not accou...
The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont:
The End: <ul><li>Thanks for viewing and listening </li></ul><ul><li>I’ll see you in Cyber Space!!! </li></ul>
References <ul><li>(2009, November 7).  Officials: fort hood shootings suspect alive; 12 dead . Retrieved from http://www....
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Justice Theory

4,774

Published on

Justice Theory 303 Final Presentation

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
4,774
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
81
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Justice Theory"

  1. 1. JUSTICE THEORY FALL 2009 Michael J. Willey
  2. 2. Lecture Roadmap <ul><li>Describe the theoretical framework and critiques of Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian perspective towards justice </li></ul><ul><li>Describe the theoretical framework and critiques of Robert Nozick and the Retributive perspective towards justice </li></ul><ul><li>Describe the theoretical framework and critiques of Howard Becker and the Labeling perspective towards justice </li></ul><ul><li>Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice </li></ul><ul><li>Relate each framework of justice with the recent Fort Hood Shooting Tragedy </li></ul>
  3. 3. Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Jeremy Bentham (Key Architect of Utilitarian Theory of Justice) </li></ul><ul><li>Utilitarian theory is derived from consequentialism and is used as a tool that judges the morality of actions based on the consequences that those actions bring about. </li></ul><ul><li>“ That actions, rules, and institutions are justified only to the extent that they bring about the greater overall good, where by “good” Bentham means pleasure and the absence of pain” (Solomon & Murphy, 1999, p. 215). </li></ul>
  4. 4. Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Emphasized a hedonistic (felicity calculus) approach that suggested that individuals seek to maximize pleasure while simultaneously minimizing pain. </li></ul><ul><li>Supported a justice system that provided the most efficient means of punishment for the good of the most amount of people. </li></ul><ul><li>Utilitarian thinking supported punishments that were impartial and only followed guidelines based on the crime itself. </li></ul><ul><li>Punishment was required in society due to the fact that it establishes boundaries for the society to base its morals, values, and to implement legislation in favor of such beliefs and to reinforce them. </li></ul><ul><li>Punishment should be inflicted on others only to the extent that it provides countervailing good to a given society (pleasure over pain principle). </li></ul>
  5. 5. Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Bentham also advocated for justice to be abandoned on four cases: </li></ul><ul><li>“ 1. Where it is groundless: where there is no mischief for it to prevent: being mischievous upon the whole. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Where it must be inefficacious: where it cannot act so as to prevent the mischief. </li></ul><ul><li>3. Where it is unprofitable, or too expensive: where the mischief it would produce would be greater than what it prevented. </li></ul><ul><li>4. Where it is needless: where the mischief may be prevented, or cease of itself, without it: that is, at a cheaper rate” (Solomon & Murphy, 1999, p. 217). </li></ul>
  6. 6. Critiques of Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarian Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Some critiques of Utilitarianism is that there are many different conceptions on the measure of pleasure and pain. </li></ul><ul><li>Others suggest that the common good characteristic of Utilitarianism can lead to unjust punishment; by way of tyranny of the majority. </li></ul><ul><li>The Utilitarian perspective does not put into account cultural values, traditions, and customs created within a society. Instead, the theory sees human progression as static and unchanging. </li></ul><ul><li>Utilitarianism assumes people are always rational and can always account for punishment administered. </li></ul><ul><li>Bentham did not properly explain the degrees on which happiness is defined. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Robert Nozick promoted the theory of Retributive Justice </li></ul><ul><li>A form of justice that is viewed to dispense justice in a fair and impartial manner </li></ul><ul><li>Looks at a injustices that happened in the past and deals with them appropriately. </li></ul><ul><li>A form of justice that sends a message to the evil doer and to others that wish to commit crime (deterrence). </li></ul>
  8. 8. Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Nozick holds that “retribution is always done for a wrong and not merely for a personal harm or offense, and that retribution requires strict limits to punishment” (Solomon & Murphy, 1999, p. 212). </li></ul><ul><li>Retributive justice is enforced and utilized for a reason and that it is meant to make the wrong doer aware of his/her actions. “This is how wrong what you did was…” (Solomon & Murphy, 1999, p. 214). </li></ul><ul><li>Retributive justice advocates that punishment should be distributed equally among those that have committed similar crimes. General standards, prima facie, are to be mandated and proclaimed. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Stresses that there are essential differences between retributive forms of justice and justice found by means of revenge </li></ul>
  10. 10. Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Retribution </li></ul><ul><li>Is done for a wrong </li></ul><ul><li>Limits the amount of punishment </li></ul><ul><li>Is impersonal </li></ul><ul><li>Impartial form of justice </li></ul><ul><li>Revenge </li></ul><ul><li>May be done to inflict harm or injury and not due to a wrong </li></ul><ul><li>Needs not to set a limit to punishment </li></ul><ul><li>Personal </li></ul><ul><li>Partial and unjust </li></ul>
  11. 11. Critiques of Robert Nozick and the Retributive Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Find that retributive justice has no substantial evidence proving that it deters crime. </li></ul><ul><li>Enacts too little punishment on those that commit crime which, in turn, does not deter others from committing more crimes. “Weak Justice.” </li></ul><ul><li>Focuses on what has happened, not what might happen </li></ul><ul><li>Does not take in account other factors for punishment distribution. (Economic status, etc). </li></ul>
  12. 12. Howard Becker and the Labeling Perspective of Justice <ul><li>Developed the Labeling Theory </li></ul><ul><li>Deviance is not the product of the wrongful act one commits, rather the definition and interpretation of the given society on what is considered “deviant.” </li></ul>
  13. 13. Howard Becker and the Labeling Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>“ Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infractions constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders” (Becker, 1963, p. 189). </li></ul><ul><li>Utilizes Durkheim’s view on structural functionalism: </li></ul><ul><li>Society itself shapes and molds the moral and legal code based exclusively on the collective thought and accord of the populace. </li></ul><ul><li>Deviant acts are inconsistent and have various ranges of inequalities (not cut and dry). Judged by the label that has successfully been applied to a person. Lacks homogeneity. </li></ul><ul><li>Recognizes the emphasis on power distribution in a given society to label one “deviant.” </li></ul>
  14. 14. Howard Becker and the Labeling Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Variations on how a society will deem an act “deviant”: </li></ul><ul><li>1. Time does have an effect on the label. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Who commits the act is essential/ as well as who is harmed by the act </li></ul><ul><li>3. Some labels of deviancy are enforced when they serve certain needs and expectations (unmarried pregnant woman) </li></ul>
  15. 15. Howard Becker and the Labeling Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>When ones are finally labeled deviants by a society: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Isolated from that society </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provided a label that is deemed appropriate for their offense </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dramatic change in public identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Associate with others that share the same label </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Critiques of Howard Becker and the Labeling Perspective of Justice Cont: <ul><li>Some critics focus on the fact that Becker’s labeling theory does not tackle the issue of why the deviance was committed in the first place, rather it focuses on the what society does after deviancy has been applied. </li></ul><ul><li>Labeling theory does not do much in the deterrence of social “deviant” behaviors. People still do things that are considered deviant despite the label. </li></ul>
  17. 17. Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice
  18. 18. Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice <ul><li>Utilitarian </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasized a hedonistic (felicity calculus) approach that suggested that individuals seek to maximize pleasure while simultaneously minimizing pain. </li></ul><ul><li>Supported a justice system that provided the most efficient means of punishment for the good of the most amount of people. </li></ul><ul><li>Punishment was required in society due to the fact that it establishes boundaries for the society to base its morals, values, and to implement legislation in favor of such beliefs and to reinforce them. </li></ul><ul><li>Retributive </li></ul><ul><li>A form of justice that sends a message to the evil doer and to others that wish to commit crime (deterrence). </li></ul><ul><li>Holds that “retribution is always done for a wrong and not merely for a personal harm or offense, and that retribution requires strict limits to punishment” (Solomon & Murphy, 1999, p. 212). </li></ul><ul><li>Retributive justice advocates that punishment should be distributed equally among those that have committed similar crimes. General standards, prima facie, are to be mandated and proclaimed. </li></ul>
  19. 19. Compare and Contrast Utilitarian, Retributive, and Labeling theories of justice Cont: <ul><li>Labeling Theory </li></ul><ul><li>Deviance is not the product of the wrongful act one commits, rather the definition and interpretation of the given society on what is considered “deviant.” </li></ul><ul><li>Utilizes Durkheim’s view on structural functionalism: </li></ul><ul><li>Society itself shapes and molds the moral and legal code based exclusively on the collective thought and accord of the populace. </li></ul><ul><li>Deviant acts are inconsistent and have various ranges of inequalities (not cut and dry). Judged by the label that has successfully been applied to a person. Lacks homogeneity. </li></ul><ul><li>Utilitarian/Retributive </li></ul><ul><li>Util: Punishment should be inflicted on others only to the extent that it provides countervailing good to a given society (pleasure over pain principle). </li></ul><ul><li>Util: Supported a justice system that provided the most efficient means of punishment for the good of the most amount of people. </li></ul><ul><li>Retrib: A dvocates that punishment should be distributed equally among those that have committed similar crimes. General standards, prima facie, are to be mandated and proclaimed. </li></ul>
  20. 20. The Tragedy at Fort Hood <ul><li>13 Miltirary and Civilian Personnel Killed. </li></ul><ul><li>30 Wounded </li></ul><ul><li>http://us.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2009/11/05/sot.obama.ft.hood.shooting.cnn </li></ul><ul><li>(&quot;Officials: fort hood,&quot; 2009) </li></ul>
  21. 21. The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>The Shooting at Fort Hood was conducted by a man named Nidal Hasan. A 39 Year-Old Major in the Army, who was of Palestinian descent. Supposedly conducted the incident in response clientele stories of the Afghan/Iraq conflict. </li></ul>
  22. 22. The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Retributive Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>All wrong acts must be punished </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>It rights a wrong and thus, punishment should be exercised to correct such a tragedy </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Utilitarian Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>All those should be punished so that it promotes the most good for the most amount of people </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Used as a method to deter others from committing such crimes </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Labeling Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Society deems such acts of mass murder as “deviant.” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strikes upon Durkheim’s notion of Social Solidarity; that people become closer with recognized and agreed definition of deviant. </li></ul></ul>
  24. 24. The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Faults with Retributive Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Does not effectively solicit responses that would deter crime </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Based on Hasan’s beliefs, he might think that he has promoted justice from his actions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Encourage others to act </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Faults with Utilitarian Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Happiness in Hasan and others like him is different than most. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Motives were not rational and his pleasure was in other’s pain </li></ul></ul>
  25. 25. The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont: <ul><li>Faults with Labeling Perspective on the Issue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Does not account for why Hasan committed such a horrific crime </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Does not deter from crimes happening again, just describes what we will brand the next mass murderer. </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. The Tragedy at Fort Hood Cont:
  27. 27. The End: <ul><li>Thanks for viewing and listening </li></ul><ul><li>I’ll see you in Cyber Space!!! </li></ul>
  28. 28. References <ul><li>(2009, November 7). Officials: fort hood shootings suspect alive; 12 dead . Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/05/texas.fort.hood.shootings/index.html </li></ul><ul><li>Becker, Howard. (1997). Outsiders . Free Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Solomon, Robert, & Murphy, Mark. (2000). What is Justice? . Oxford University Press, USA. </li></ul>
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×