The Philosophical Theory of the StateBosanquet, Bernard
Philosophy
The Philosophical Theory of the State
Bosanquet, Bernard
Political science -- Philosophy; State, The -- Philosophy
But there is a deeper difficulty. If the reformation theory is to be
seriously distinguished from the other theories of punishment, it has
a meaning which is unjust to the offender himself. It implies that
his offence is a merely natural evil, like disease, and can be cured
by therapeutic treatment directed to removing its causes. But this
is to treat him not as a human being; to treat him as a “patient,”
not as an agent; to exclude him from the general recognition that
makes us men. (If the therapeutic treatment includes a recognition
and chastisement of the offender’s bad will [1]--the form of which
chastisement may, of course, be very variously modified--then
there is no longer anything to distinguish the reformatory theory
from other theories of punishment.) It has been lately pointed out
[2] what a confusion is involved in the claim that beings, who
are irresponsible and so incapable of guilt, are therefore in the
strict sense innocent. Here are the true objects {223} for a pure
reformatory theory. Here that may freely be done, as to creatures
incapable of rights, which is kindest for them and safest for
society, from quasi-medical treatment to extirpation. There is no
guilt in them to demand punishment, but there is no human will in
them to have the rights of innocence.
[1] Plato’s reformatory theory seems to involve this.
[2] Mr. Bradley, in the _International Journal of Ethics_, April,
1894.
But, applied to responsible human beings, such a theory, if really
kept to its distinctive contention, is an insult. It leads to the
notion that the State may take hold of any man, whose life or ideas
are thought capable of improvement, and set to work to ameliorate
them by forcible treatment. There is no true punishment except where
one is an offender against a system of rights which he shares, and
therefore against himself. And such an offender has a right to the
recognition of his hostile will; it is inhuman to treat him as a wild
animal or a child, whom we simply mould to our aims. Without such
a recognition, to be punished is not, according to the old Scotch
phrase, to be “justified.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account