论死刑的道德性

Meir Dan-Cohen
{"title":"论死刑的道德性","authors":"Meir Dan-Cohen","doi":"10.15779/Z38CC0TT5X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is generally agreed that to be morally, and in the US, constitutionally, permissible, the death penalty must accord with human dignity. I argue that it does not. To this end, I sketch a conception of dignity, embedded in Kantian moral theory, which helps assess when violations of dignity take place, as well as appreciate the high moral stakes such violations involve.","PeriodicalId":386851,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the (Im)morality of the Death Penalty\",\"authors\":\"Meir Dan-Cohen\",\"doi\":\"10.15779/Z38CC0TT5X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is generally agreed that to be morally, and in the US, constitutionally, permissible, the death penalty must accord with human dignity. I argue that it does not. To this end, I sketch a conception of dignity, embedded in Kantian moral theory, which helps assess when violations of dignity take place, as well as appreciate the high moral stakes such violations involve.\",\"PeriodicalId\":386851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38CC0TT5X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38CC0TT5X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们普遍认为,死刑必须符合人的尊严,这在道德上是允许的,在美国是宪法允许的。我认为并非如此。为此,我概述了一个嵌入康德道德理论的尊严概念,它有助于评估何时发生对尊严的侵犯,以及理解这种侵犯所涉及的高度道德风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the (Im)morality of the Death Penalty
It is generally agreed that to be morally, and in the US, constitutionally, permissible, the death penalty must accord with human dignity. I argue that it does not. To this end, I sketch a conception of dignity, embedded in Kantian moral theory, which helps assess when violations of dignity take place, as well as appreciate the high moral stakes such violations involve.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信