A penalty is the imposition of unwanted or unpleasant results on groups or individuals, imposed by authorities - in the context of child discipline for criminal law - in response to and barriers to certain undesirable actions or behaviors or unacceptable. The reason may be to condition a child so as not to endanger himself, to impose social adjustment (in particular, in the context of compulsory education or military discipline), to defend norms, to protect against future harm (in particular, those who commit crimes by violence), and to defend the law - and respect the rule of law - in which social groups are governed. Punishment can be self-defeating as with whipping and torture of the flesh in religious settings, but most often a form of social compulsion.
Unpleasant improbability may include fines, penalties, or confinement, or the removal or rejection of something pleasant or desirable. The individual may be a person, or even an animal. Authority may be a group or a single person, and punishment can be formally undertaken under the legal system or informally in other types of social arrangements such as within the family. Unauthorized or managed unauthorized negative consequences are not considered penalties as defined herein. The lessons and the practice of criminal punishment, especially those applicable to prisons, are called penologists, or, often in modern texts, corrections; in this context, the penalty process is subtly called the "correctional process". Research on punishment often includes similar research on prevention.
Justification for punishment includes retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. The latter may include acts such as isolation, to prevent the person making the mistake related to the potential victim, or the hand removal to make the theft more difficult. Of the four justifications, only retribution is part of the definition of punishment and no other justification guarantees results, apart from obvious exceptions such as those who are executed who are incapable in the event of further crime.
If only some of the conditions included in the definition of punishment exist, descriptions other than "punishment" can be considered more accurate. To cause something negative, or unpleasant, to a person or animal, without authority regarded as revenge or revenge rather than punishment. In addition, the word "punishment" is used as a metaphor, as when a boxer experiences "punishment" during a fight. In other situations, breaking the rules may be rewarded, and so accepting such a gift naturally is not a punishment. Eventually the condition of breaking (or breaking) the rules must be met for consequences is considered punishment.
Punishment differs in severity, and may include sanctions such as reprimands, deprivation of privileges or freedoms, fines, imprisonment, exclusion, sickness, amputations and death penalty. Physical punishment refers to a punishment in which the physical pain is meant to be inflicted upon the offender. Punishment can be judged fair or unfair in terms of reciprocity and proportionality to the offense. Punishment can be an integral part of socialization, and punish undesirable behavior often becomes part of a pedagogical system or behavior modification that also includes rewards.
Video Punishment
Definition
In philosophy
Various philosophers have presented the definition of punishment. A condition generally considered necessary to describe an act as punishment is that
- is imposed by the authority,
- It involves some harm to the proper offender,
- this in response to the violation and
- the person (or animal) to whom the loss is liable shall be deemed to be at least liable for the breach.
In psychology
Introduced by B. Skin Skinner, punishment has a more rigorous and technical definition. Along with the reinforcement it falls under the category of operant conditioning. Operant conditioning refers to learning by punishment (often confused as negative reinforcement) or rewards that serve as a positive reinforcement of lessons to be learned. In psychology, punishment is the reduction of behavior through the application of an unpleasant stimulus ("positive" punishment) or deletion of a stimulus that is pleasing ("negative" punishment). Additional or hit jobs are examples of positive punishment, while releasing student breaks or privileged play are examples of negative punishment. Definition requires that punishment is only determined after the fact by behavioral reduction; if the offending behavior of the subject is not reduced, it is not considered a punishment. There are several combinations of penalties and rejection, although the reluctance that does not diminish behavior is not considered a punishment in psychology. In addition, "aversive stimulus" is a behavioral label that generally applies to negative reinforcers (as in avoidance learning), rather than punishers.
In socio-biology
Punishment is sometimes called revenge or moralistic aggression ; has been observed in all species of social animals, which lead evolutionary biologists to conclude that it is an evolutionary stable strategy, chosen for supporting cooperative behavior.
Examples of sociobiological uses
One criticism of the claims of all social animals that are evolutionally embedded for punishment comes from animal research, such as the octopus near Capri, Italy that suddenly forms the communal culture of having, until then life alive. During periods of heavy fishing and tourism that penetrated their territory, they began to live in groups, learn each other, especially hunting techniques. Younger young octopuses may be near adult octopus without being eaten by them, although they, like other Octopus vulgaris, are cannibals before shortly before the formation of groups. The authors emphasize that these behavioral changes occur too quickly to be the genetic characteristics of octopuses, and that of course there are no other "natural" mammals or "social" animals that punish the octopus for involvement in cannibalism. The authors also note that octopuses adopt observational learning without a specific evolutionary history of adaptation to it.
There are also arguments against the idea of ​​punishment that requires intelligence, based on the study of punishment in small brains like insects. There is evidence of honeybee workers with mutations that make them fertile nesting only when other honey bees do not notice them, and that some who are caught in the action are killed. This is corroborated by computer simulations proving that some simple reactions well in the general view of very limited insect intelligence are enough to mimic the "political" behavior observed in great apes. The authors argue that this falsified the claim that punishment evolved as a strategy for dealing with individuals who were able to know what they were doing.
In the case of a more complex brain, the idea of ​​evolutionary election for specific punishment for deliberately chosen rule violations and/or wrongdoers capable of making intentional choices (eg, punishing humans for temporary murder not punishing deadly viruses) is subject to criticism of co-evolution problem. That the punishment of individuals with certain characteristics (including, in principle, not limited to mental ability) chooses against such characteristics, makes the evolution of mental abilities considered the basis of criminal responsibility impossible in a population subject to such selective punishment. Certain scientists argue that it denies the idea that humans have biological feelings of deliberate abuses that deserve to be punished.
Maps Punishment
Application scope
Punishment is applied to the most general, purposeful goals, to encourage and enforce appropriate behavior as defined by society or family. Criminals are punished by law, with fines, physical punishment or imprisonment such as imprisonment; detainees risk further punishment for violations of internal rules. Children, students and other trainees may be punished by their instructor or instructor (especially parent, guardian, or teacher, tutor and coach) - see Child Discipline.
Slaves, domestic servants and others are subject to punishment by their master. Employees can still be subject to contracts in the form of fines or demotions. Most hierarchical organizations, such as military and police forces, or even churches, still apply fairly rigid internal discipline, even with their own judicial system (military courts, canonical courts).
The punishment may also apply to morals, especially religious, basic, such as in voluntary redemption or forced into theocracy with religious police (such as in a strict Islamic state like Iran or under the Taliban) or (though not true theocracy) by Inquisition.
Hell as punishment
The conviction that the ultimate punishment of individuals is being sent by God, supreme authority, to existence in Hell, a place believed to be in the afterlife, usually in accordance with sin committed during their lives. Sometimes this distinction is specific, with the accursed souls suffering for every sin committed (see for example Plato's myth of Er or Dante's The Divine Comedy ), but sometimes they are common, damned sinful people who are degraded into one or more Hell chambers or to the level of suffering.
In many religious cultures, including Christianity and Islam, Hell has traditionally been described as volatile and painful, giving rise to guilt and suffering. Despite this general description of Hell as a place of fire, some other traditions describe hell as cold. The Buddha - and especially the Tibetan Buddha - the description of hell displays the same amount of heat and cold hell. Among the Christian descriptions, Dante's
History and reasons
Seriousness of crime; Punishment in accordance with crime
A principle that is often mentioned in connection with the level of punishment that must be imposed is that punishment must be in accordance with the crime. One of the standards for measurement is the extent to which crime affects others or society. Measures of seriousness of crime have been developed. A crime is generally regarded as a crime of "high seriousness", while minor crimes do not.
Possible reasons for punishment
There are many possible reasons that may be given to justify or explain why a person should be punished; here follows a typical outline, a possible justification of contradiction.
Prevention (prevention)
One of the reasons given for justifying the punishment is that it is the act of preventing people from committing an offense - preventing previous offenders from re-offending, and preventing those who may be contemplating an offense for which they have not committed themselves from actually doing so. This penalty is intended to be sufficient that people will choose not to commit a crime rather than to be punished. The goal is to deter everyone in the community from committing an offense.
Some criminologists claim that the number of people convicted of crimes is not reduced as a result of the more severe punishment and concludes that prevention is ineffective. Other criminologists dismiss the conclusion, citing that while most people do not know the exact extent of punishment as to whether the penalty for murder is 40 years or life, most people still know the rough outline such as punishment for armed robbery or rape according to law worse than punishment for driving too fast or misparking a car. Therefore, these criminologists argue that the absence of a deterrent effect to increase punishment for crimes that have been severely punished does not say anything about the importance of the existence of punishment as a barrier factor.
Some criminologists argue that increasing penalties for crime can lead criminal investigators to give higher priority to such crimes so a higher percentage of those who do them are punished for them, causing statistics to give a false appearance of increasing crime. These criminologists argue that the use of statistics to measure the efficiency of methods of combating crime is the danger of creating reward racks that make the most inefficient criminal justice system seem best in the fight against crime, and that the emergence of ineffective deterrents may be an example of this.
Rehabilitation
Some penalties include working to reform and rehabilitate the perpetrators so that they will not commit any more offenses. It is distinguished from deterrence, because the goal here is to change the offender's attitude toward what they have done, and make them realize that their behavior is wrong.
Incapacitation and social protection
Incapacitation as a justification of punishment refers to the abuser's ability to commit further aborted offenses. Prisons separate offenders from the community, eliminating or reducing their ability to commit certain crimes. The death penalty does this in a permanent (and irrevocable) manner. In some societies, people who steal have been punished with their hands amputated.
Levies
Criminal activities usually benefit the offender and the loss to the victim. Punishment has been justified as a measure of retributive justice, in which the aim is to try to rebalance the unfair advantage gained by ensuring that the offender also suffers losses. Sometimes it is seen as a way of "taking revenge" with the wrongdoer - the sufferer's misery is seen as a desirable goal in itself, even if it has no beneficial benefit to the victim. One of the reasons people have been punished is to reduce the need for retaliation of "street justice", bloodshed and vigilante.
Recovery
For minor offenses, the punishment may be a "fixing error" offender, or compensating the victim. Community service or compensation orders are examples of such punishment. In the model of "Restorative Justice," victims take an active role in the process with their offenders who are encouraged to take responsibility for their actions, "to correct the damage they have done - by apologizing, returning the stolen money, or community service ". The approach of restorative justice aims to help offenders want to avoid future violations.
Education and rejection
Punishment can be explained by positive prevention theory to use the criminal justice system to teach people what social norms are for what is right, and act as reinforcement.
Punishment can serve as a means for the public to publicly express a denial of an act as a criminal. In addition to educating people about unacceptable behavior, it doubles the function of preventing vigilante justice by acknowledging public anger, while capturing future criminal acts by stigmatizing perpetrators. This is sometimes called "Expressive Theory" of rejection. Pillars are a method of public complaints.
Some critics of the model of education and condemnation cite the problem of evolution with the idea that feelings for punishment as a social signaling system evolve if punishment is ineffective. Critics argue that some people spend their time and energy and take risks in punishing others, and the likelihood of losing members of punished groups will be chosen if the punishment is not working other than a signal that can evolve to work in a less risky way.
Integrated theory
An integrated punishment theory brings together punishment goals - such as retribution, prevention and rehabilitation - in a single, coherent framework. Instead of punishment demanding that we choose between them, integrated theorists argue that they work together as part of some broader goals such as the protection of rights.
Criticism
Some people think that overall punishment is unhelpful and even harmful to the people who are used to resist. Detractors argue that punishment is just wrong, from the same design as "two mistakes make a right". Critics argue that punishment is merely revenge. Professor Deirdre Golash, author of the book, Cases of Punishment: Levy, Crime Prevention, and Law , states in his book that,
We should not impose danger on anyone unless we have a very good reason to do so. This statement may seem trivial, but the history of mankind is full of examples of the deliberate suffering of dangers by well-meaning people in vain endless pursuits that do no further harm, or in the pursuit of a questionable end. These humanitarian benefactors sacrificed their companions to fill the mystical gods and torture them to save their souls from the mythical hell, breaking and tying the feet of the children to promote their last marriage, beating the slow school children to promote learning and respect teachers, make them sick. for leeches to get rid of them from excess blood, and put the suspects to the shelves and thumbs in the ministry of truth. They educate themselves not to feel compassionate - unleashing human compassion in higher service. The deliberate act of mistaken belief that it promotes the greater good is the heart of the tragedy. We should ask whether the items we are looking for harm the worthy offenders, and whether the way we choose will actually secure them.
Golash also made a statement about the prison,
Prison means, at the very least, loss of freedom and autonomy, as well as much material comfort, personal security, and access to heterosexual relationships. This revocation, according to Gresham Sykes (who first identified them) "jointly handles" severe injuries "leading to" the basics of prisoners' existence.
But this is only the minimum damage suffered by the least vulnerable prisoners in the best-run prisons. Most of the prisons are run poorly, and in some cases, the condition is more grubby than in the worst slums. In the District of Columbia prison, for example, prisoners should wash their clothes and bed linens in the cell toilet because the washing machine is broken. Vermin and insects occupy buildings, where air vents are clogged with accumulated dust and dirt for decades. But even inmates in prison where sanitary conditions still have to deal with the deafening boredom and emptiness of the life of the vast prison of the wasted days where little in the way of meaningful activity is possible.
Damage to thinking and repair
There are critics of punishment who argue that punishments aimed at deliberate actions force people to suppress their ability to act on intent. Advocates of this point of view argue that such an intentional emphasis causes malicious behavior to persist, making penalties counterproductive. These people argue that the ability to make deliberate choices should be valuable as a source of possible improvement, arguing that complicated cognition would be a waste of useless and useless energy if it leads to the justification of fixed action and no change as incapacity simple to understand arguments is the most frugal protection from being misled by them if arguments are used for social manipulation, and reject the criticism of people who intentionally do bad things.
See also
References
General reference
- Ã, "Punishment". EncyclopÃÆ'Â|dia Britannica . 22 (issue 11). 1911. p.Ã, 653. Ã,
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Punishment
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - The Law of Punishment
- Online Etymology
- Brooks, Thom (2012). Punishment . New York: Routledge. ISBN: 9780415850513. Ã,
- Zaibert, Leo (2006). Punishment and retaliation . Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate. ISBN 0-7546-2389-0.
External links
- "Punishment". Encyclopedia of Internet Philosophy .
- "The Moral Permissibility of Punishment". Encyclopedia of Internet Philosophy .
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments