Don't Abandon the Model Penal Code Yet! Thinking Through Simons's Rethinking

Kimberly Kessler Ferzan
{"title":"Don't Abandon the Model Penal Code Yet! Thinking Through Simons's Rethinking","authors":"Kimberly Kessler Ferzan","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Criminal law theorists argue that culpability is a prerequisite for blameworthiness and responsibility. The definition above renders our endeavor circular. What does it mean to say someone is culpable? For some time, we thought we knew the answer to this question. Culpability was about choosing to commit a wrong, and the nature of this choice determined the degree of culpability. This is the view of the Model Penal Code. Yet, as this Symposium reveals, our consensus has devolved to dissensus. Criminal law theorists are now challenging the conventional framework’s ability to capture culpability adequately. These theorists argue that our current culpability theory pays insufficient attention to the motives, emotions, and desires of the actor and that these elements are a constitutive part of culpability.","PeriodicalId":344882,"journal":{"name":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Criminal law theorists argue that culpability is a prerequisite for blameworthiness and responsibility. The definition above renders our endeavor circular. What does it mean to say someone is culpable? For some time, we thought we knew the answer to this question. Culpability was about choosing to commit a wrong, and the nature of this choice determined the degree of culpability. This is the view of the Model Penal Code. Yet, as this Symposium reveals, our consensus has devolved to dissensus. Criminal law theorists are now challenging the conventional framework’s ability to capture culpability adequately. These theorists argue that our current culpability theory pays insufficient attention to the motives, emotions, and desires of the actor and that these elements are a constitutive part of culpability.
不要放弃模范刑法典!通过西蒙斯的反思来思考
刑法理论家认为,罪责是罪责和责任的先决条件。上述定义使我们的努力循环往复。说某人有罪是什么意思?有一段时间,我们以为我们知道这个问题的答案。罪责是指选择犯错误,而这种选择的性质决定了罪责的程度。这是《示范刑法典》的观点。然而,正如这次研讨会所揭示的那样,我们的共识已经变成了分歧。刑法理论家现在正在挑战传统框架充分捕捉罪责的能力。这些理论家认为,我们目前的罪责理论对行为人的动机、情感和欲望关注不足,而这些因素是罪责的组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信