نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار حقوق جزا و جرمشناسی، دانشکدهی علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه کردستان، سنندج، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Consequentialists justify the use of punishment based on its outcome in the rehabilitation of the offender, ensuring public happiness, and general and specific deterrence. The most serious question facing such justifications is whether the use of bad means (evil) to achieve a good goal is morally justifiable? This article, relying on a descriptive-analytical method, states that the application of punishment is the infliction of pain and suffering on the body and mind of the convicted, and its justification is based on a good end - assuming there is a definition of good - and benevolent motives can be criticized, and this will lead to the justification of the use of bad means to achieve a good end. At the same time, punishment, based on some primary and absolute duties - which are also accepted by consequentialists - is prohibited; because the infliction of pain and suffering on others is not morally justifiable. Also, consequentialists cannot prove that there is a causal relationship between the application of a specific type and the amount of punishment deterrence or rehabilitation of the perpetrator and even the ensuring public happiness.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)