邪恶与重罪:一个关于定罪的问题

L. Katz
{"title":"邪恶与重罪:一个关于定罪的问题","authors":"L. Katz","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Etymology notwithstanding, not all seriously harmful villainies qualify as felonies. Or at least our moral intuition tells us that they should not. Traditional approaches to criminalization - like utilitarianism, the harm theory, legal moralism - have real trouble accounting for that, indeed have rarely even addressed it, and need to be revised somewhat to deal with it. But even if we know which harmful villainies we do not want to criminalize and why, we are still left with difficult and unexplored questions about whether we should let the non-criminalizable misconduct figure more indirectly in our application of criminal law doctrines, in determining for instance the scope of self-defense, or recklessness, or proximate causation, or necessity. Although this essay has dealt mostly with harmful misconduct, the analysis has implications as well for more familiarly hard-to-criminalize wrongdoing, like self-injurious behavior, and certain interactions between consenting adults.","PeriodicalId":344882,"journal":{"name":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","volume":"292 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Villainy and Felony: A Problem Concerning Criminalization\",\"authors\":\"L. Katz\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.451\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Etymology notwithstanding, not all seriously harmful villainies qualify as felonies. Or at least our moral intuition tells us that they should not. Traditional approaches to criminalization - like utilitarianism, the harm theory, legal moralism - have real trouble accounting for that, indeed have rarely even addressed it, and need to be revised somewhat to deal with it. But even if we know which harmful villainies we do not want to criminalize and why, we are still left with difficult and unexplored questions about whether we should let the non-criminalizable misconduct figure more indirectly in our application of criminal law doctrines, in determining for instance the scope of self-defense, or recklessness, or proximate causation, or necessity. Although this essay has dealt mostly with harmful misconduct, the analysis has implications as well for more familiarly hard-to-criminalize wrongdoing, like self-injurious behavior, and certain interactions between consenting adults.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344882,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Buffalo Criminal Law Review\",\"volume\":\"292 2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Buffalo Criminal Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.451\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2002.6.1.451","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

不管词源如何,并不是所有严重有害的恶棍都有资格成为重罪。或者至少我们的道德直觉告诉我们,他们不应该这么做。传统的定罪方法——如功利主义、伤害理论、法律道德主义——在解释这一点上确实有困难,实际上甚至很少涉及到这一点,需要进行一些修改来处理它。但是,即使我们知道我们不想将哪些有害的恶行定为犯罪,以及为什么,我们仍然有一些困难和未探索的问题,即我们是否应该让不可定为犯罪的不当行为更间接地出现在我们对刑法理论的应用中,例如确定自卫的范围,或鲁莽,或近因关系,或必要性。虽然这篇文章主要讨论的是有害的不当行为,但它的分析也对更熟悉的难以定罪的不当行为有影响,比如自残行为,以及成年人之间自愿的某些互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Villainy and Felony: A Problem Concerning Criminalization
Etymology notwithstanding, not all seriously harmful villainies qualify as felonies. Or at least our moral intuition tells us that they should not. Traditional approaches to criminalization - like utilitarianism, the harm theory, legal moralism - have real trouble accounting for that, indeed have rarely even addressed it, and need to be revised somewhat to deal with it. But even if we know which harmful villainies we do not want to criminalize and why, we are still left with difficult and unexplored questions about whether we should let the non-criminalizable misconduct figure more indirectly in our application of criminal law doctrines, in determining for instance the scope of self-defense, or recklessness, or proximate causation, or necessity. Although this essay has dealt mostly with harmful misconduct, the analysis has implications as well for more familiarly hard-to-criminalize wrongdoing, like self-injurious behavior, and certain interactions between consenting adults.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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