Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/11375/24132
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | Igneski, Violetta | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hirmiz, Rand | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-03-22T12:41:38Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-03-22T12:41:38Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2018 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11375/24132 | - |
dc.description.abstract | In this thesis I argue that legal punishment is far from perfect, and that the most common defenses used to justify it prove to be unsuccessful when examined closely. I propose that if there exists an alternative, non-punitive, practice capable of achieving the same benefits, then that practice should be preferred over punishment. I then proceed to introduce one such alternative, the theory of pure restitution, and resolve some problems raised by its critics. I ultimately demonstrate not only that pure restitution is capable of achieving the same benefits as punishment, but that it is capable of achieving even further benefits. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.subject | pure restitution | en_US |
dc.subject | punishment | en_US |
dc.subject | restorative justice | en_US |
dc.subject | Arthur Ripstein | en_US |
dc.subject | David Boonin | en_US |
dc.subject | Randy Barnett | en_US |
dc.subject | Joel Feinberg | en_US |
dc.title | A Defense of Pure Restitution | en_US |
dc.type | Thesis | en_US |
dc.contributor.department | Philosophy | en_US |
dc.description.degreetype | Thesis | en_US |
dc.description.degree | Master of Arts (MA) | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Open Access Dissertations and Theses |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Hirmiz_Rand_201808_MA.pdf | 628.04 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.