Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

In defence of Punishment and the unified theory of punishment : a reply.

Brooks, Thom (2016) 'In defence of Punishment and the unified theory of punishment : a reply.', Criminal law and philosophy., 10 (3). pp. 629-638.

Abstract

My book, Punishment, has three aims: to provide the most comprehensive and updated examination of the philosophy of punishment available, to advance a new theory—the unified theory of punishment—as a compelling alternative to available theories and to consider the relation of theory to practice. In his recent review article, Mark Tunick raises several concerns with my analysis. I address each of these concerns and argue they rest largely on misinterpretations which I restate and clarify here.

Item Type:Article
Keywords:Expressivism, Hegel, Legal moralism, Retribution, Unified theory of punishment.
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
(317Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11572-014-9348-8
Publisher statement:The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11572-014-9348-8.
Date accepted:No date available
Date deposited:11 November 2014
Date of first online publication:12 November 2014
Date first made open access:No date available

Save or Share this output

Export:
Export
Look up in GoogleScholar