Abstract
In his recent monumental book On What Matters, Derek Parfit argues for a hard determinist view that rejects free will-based moral responsibility and desert. This rejection of desert is necessary for his main aim in the book, the overall reconciliation of normative ethics. In Appendix E of his book, however, Parfit claims that it is possible to mete out fair punishment. Parfit’s position on punishment here seems to be inconsistent with his hard determinism. I argue that Parfit is mistaken here, in a way that leads him to unjustified optimism about the possibility of fair penalization. Insofar as we take the free will problem seriously, we cannot reconcile a belief in the absence of desert with a belief in the fairness of penalization.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 139-148 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Journal of Ethics |
Volume | 20 |
Issue number | 1-3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1 Sep 2016 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2016, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
Keywords
- Desert
- Fairness
- Free will
- Moral responsibility
- Parfit, Derek
- Punishment
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy