LAW 6846 .001
Seminar: Philosophy of Punishment
Spring 2013
1:25-3:25 p.m. Tuesdays
Location: Mondale N209
———————
Instructor: Zach Hoskins
E-mail: zhoskins@umn.edu
Office: Mondale 311
Office hours: 3-4 p.m. Wednesdays, or by appointment
———————
Course description:
As a legal institution, punishment presents a distinctive moral challenge in that it involves a political
community’s inflicting intentionally harsh treatment on some of its members, treating them in ways that
would typically be morally wrong. This seminar will examine central philosophical questions surrounding
criminal punishment, including these: What is punishment? Is the practice justified? Why? What principles
should constrain how much we may punish? What sorts of behavior may the state properly punish? What
are our obligations to ex-offenders?
We’ll read and discuss work by leading philosophers and legal theorists writing about punishment. The
aim will be to assess critically the various writers’ arguments, and subject our own views to scrutiny, to
come to a better understanding of the appropriate purposes and limits of punishment.
Required text:
R. A. Duff, Punishment, Communication, and Community (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001). ISBN:
0-19-516666-3.
Other readings are available via eReserves.
———————
Grades:
35%
35%
20%
10%
—
—
—
—
First essay; due March 22
Second essay; due May 4
Reading summaries
Attendance and participation
Essays: For each of these assignments, you should write an essay of approximately 15 pages addressing
one of the issues we’ve discussed in class. These should be constructive, philosophical essays.
Basically, this means you should analyze some issue we’ve discussed, including the competing
positions offered by the authors we’ve read, and then defend a position, offering your own
arguments in support of your view (we’ll discuss this more as the first essay deadline approaches).
Your topic is up to you, but you should get it approved by me ahead of time. No late essays will be
accepted, and no incompletes will be given.
Reading summaries: You’re expected to write and bring to class brief summaries of each session’s
assigned readings (roughly 1/2 page per reading). Note: I won’t necessarily be demanding highlevel, insightful commentary from these summaries (though it’s certainly welcome). The point is just
to keep you honest with doing the readings — especially as the term gets busy and it becomes
tempting to start letting things slide. It’s important that we all come to class having read the
assigned articles and ready to participate in the class discussion. So these summaries just need to
make it clear to me that you’ve done the readings.
But, there’s good news: You can skip the summaries for up to two class sessions without it affecting
your grade, so as long as you turn in reading summaries for 10 of our class sessions, you’ll be fine.
Attendance and participation: You should come to each class prepared to discuss the assigned readings.
Grade disputes: If you think a grade you receive is unfair, don’t immediately rush to my desk after class
(or to my office hour) to protest. Instead, spend at least a couple of days reading over and
considering the comments I gave your paper, and if you’re still convinced the grade is unfair, type
up a one- to two-page request for a reconsideration of the grade, explaining why you believe the
grade was unfair even in light of the comments I gave. E-mail the request to me, and after I’ve read
over your request, we can schedule an office visit to talk about it. Note that there’s no guarantee
that I’ll agree with your request and raise your grade, and in fact if I do reread and reconsider your
assignment, there’s a chance that the grade could go down rather than up.
———————
Topics and reading assignments
Jan. 22, Introduction to course
Jan. 29, What is punishment, and why does it need justification?
DUFF, xi-xx
David Boonin, “The Problem of Punishment” (eRes)
Joel Feinberg, “The Expressive Function of Punishment” (eRes)
Feb. 5, Consequentialism
DUFF, 3-10
Jeremy Bentham, from An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (eRes)
Nigel Walker, “Reductivism and Deterrence” (eRes)
Feb. 12, Retributivism
DUFF, 19-30
Immanuel Kant, from The Metaphysics of Morals (eRes)
Michael S. Moore, “The Moral Worth of Retribution” (eRes)
Feb. 19, Fairness
Herbert Morris, “Persons and Punishment” (eRes)
Richard Dagger, “Playing Fair with Punishment” (eRes)
Feb. 26, Rights forfeiture
DUFF, 14-16
C. W. Morris, “Punishment and Loss of Moral Standing” (eRes)
Richard Lippke, “Criminal Offenders and Right Forfeiture” (eRes)
March 5, Moral education
Jean Hampton, “The Moral Education Theory of Punishment” (eRes)
Russ Shafer-Landau, “Can Punishment Morally Educate?” (eRes)
Submit 2-3 questions by today for Professor Duff, to discuss next week.
March 12, Communication
DUFF, 75-130
Professor Duff will join us to discuss his work and field your questions.
*March 19, NO CLASS (spring break)*
*First essay due March 22 (via e-mail)
March 26, Hybrid theories
DUFF, 11-14
H. L. A. Hart, “Prolegomenon to the Principles of Punishment” (eRes)
Whitley Kaufman, “The Rise and Fall of the Mixed Theory of Punishment” (eRes)
April 2, How much?
Andrew von Hirsch, “Proportionate Sentences: A Desert Perspective” (eRes)
Michael Tonry, “Proportionality, Parsimony, and Interchangeability of Punishments” (eRes)
Russ Shafer-Landau, “Retributivism and Desert” (eRes)
April 9, What means?
Peter Moskos, from In Defense of Flogging (eRes)
Michel Foucault, “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison” (eRes)
April 16, What’s punishable?
R. A. Duff et. al., “Introduction: The Boundaries of the Criminal Law” (eRes)
Douglas Husak, “Guns and Drugs: Case Studies on the Principled Limits of the Criminal Sanction” (eRes)
April 23, After punishment
Readings TBD
*Second essay due May 4 (via e-mail).