REFF - Faculty of Philosophy Repository
University of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy
    • English
    • Српски
    • Српски (Serbia)
  • English 
    • English
    • Serbian (Cyrillic)
    • Serbian (Latin)
  • Login
View Item 
  •   REFF
  • Filozofija / Philosophy
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za filozofiju
  • View Item
  •   REFF
  • Filozofija / Philosophy
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za filozofiju
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Retributivne teorije kazne

Retributive theories of punishment

Thumbnail
2013
1709.pdf (290.8Kb)
Authors
Milevski, Voin
Article (Published version)
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Jedan od najozbiljnijih problema u filozofiji je neobična i krajnje neprijatna činjenica da se termini koriste na višesmislen i nejasan način. Upravo to je slučaj sa terminom 'retribucija' (retribution). Naime, u filozofskoj literaturi o kazni jako često se događa da se mnoge teorije nazivaju 'retributivnim teorijama kazne', kao i to da se vrlo široko i na krajnje višesmislen način upotrebljava termin 'retribucija'. Šta zapravo znači 'retribucija'? Da li sve teorije koje se klasifikuju kao retributivne zaista mogu da se ispravno okarakterišu na taj način? To su ključna pitanja na koja Džon Kotingem nastoji da odgovori u svom tekstu. Glavni cilj ovog rada je da se predstavi klasifikacija retributivnih teorija koju Kotingem izvodi, da se objasni njen značaj, kao i njeni eventualni nedostaci. Pokazaće se da je Kotingemova klasifikacija, uprkos nekim nedostacima i nedoslednostima, još uvek jedna od najtemeljnijih analiza retributivnih teorija kazne koja je napisana u okviru radova koji spa...daju u filozofiju kazne.

One of the most serious problems facing the analysis of philosophical arguments is the fat that some of the main terms in those arguments are ambiguous and vague. This is exactly the case with the term 'retribution'. Namely, in the philosophical literature about moral justification of punishment many quite dissimilar theories are often characterized as retributive theories of punishment. Also, the term 'retribution' is typically used in a very broad and imprecise way. What exactly is the meaning of the term 'retribution'? Is it the case that all the theories that are classified as retributive can be properly characterized in that way? These are the main questions that John Cottingham attempts to answer in his analysis of retributive theories of punishment. The main goal of this paper is to present Cottingham's classification of retributive theories, as well as to explain its significance and potential defects. I hope that in the course of this paper it will become clear that, despite s...ome minor flaws and shortcomings, Cottingham's classification is still one the most thorough analysis of retributive theories of punishment, and that it is the best introduction to retributivism for anyone who is interested in the philosophy of punishment.

Keywords:
zasluga / teorija kazne / retribucija / restitucija / denuncijacija / theory of punishment / retribution / restitution / desert / denunciation
Source:
Theoria, 2013, 56, 2, 37-59
Publisher:
  • Srpsko filozofsko društvo, Beograd
Funding / projects:
  • Dynamic Systems in Nature and Society: Philosophical and Empirical Aspects (RS-179041)

ISSN: 0351-2274

[ Google Scholar ]
Handle
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1712
URI
http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1712
Collections
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za filozofiju
Institution/Community
Filozofija / Philosophy
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Milevski, Voin
PY  - 2013
UR  - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1712
AB  - Jedan od najozbiljnijih problema u filozofiji je neobična i krajnje neprijatna činjenica da se termini koriste na višesmislen i nejasan način. Upravo to je slučaj sa terminom 'retribucija' (retribution). Naime, u filozofskoj literaturi o kazni jako često se događa da se mnoge teorije nazivaju 'retributivnim teorijama kazne', kao i to da se vrlo široko i na krajnje višesmislen način upotrebljava termin 'retribucija'. Šta zapravo znači 'retribucija'? Da li sve teorije koje se klasifikuju kao retributivne zaista mogu da se ispravno okarakterišu na taj način? To su ključna pitanja na koja Džon Kotingem nastoji da odgovori u svom tekstu. Glavni cilj ovog rada je da se predstavi klasifikacija retributivnih teorija koju Kotingem izvodi, da se objasni njen značaj, kao i njeni eventualni nedostaci. Pokazaće se da je Kotingemova klasifikacija, uprkos nekim nedostacima i nedoslednostima, još uvek jedna od najtemeljnijih analiza retributivnih teorija kazne koja je napisana u okviru radova koji spadaju u filozofiju kazne.
AB  - One of the most serious problems facing the analysis of philosophical arguments is the fat that some of the main terms in those arguments are ambiguous and vague. This is exactly the case with the term 'retribution'. Namely, in the philosophical literature about moral justification of punishment many quite dissimilar theories are often characterized as retributive theories of punishment. Also, the term 'retribution' is typically used in a very broad and imprecise way. What exactly is the meaning of the term 'retribution'? Is it the case that all the theories that are classified as retributive can be properly characterized in that way? These are the main questions that John Cottingham attempts to answer in his analysis of retributive theories of punishment. The main goal of this paper is to present Cottingham's classification of retributive theories, as well as to explain its significance and potential defects. I hope that in the course of this paper it will become clear that, despite some minor flaws and shortcomings, Cottingham's classification is still one the most thorough analysis of retributive theories of punishment, and that it is the best introduction to retributivism for anyone who is interested in the philosophy of punishment.
PB  - Srpsko filozofsko društvo, Beograd
T2  - Theoria
T1  - Retributivne teorije kazne
T1  - Retributive theories of punishment
EP  - 59
IS  - 2
SP  - 37
VL  - 56
UR  - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1712
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Milevski, Voin",
year = "2013",
abstract = "Jedan od najozbiljnijih problema u filozofiji je neobična i krajnje neprijatna činjenica da se termini koriste na višesmislen i nejasan način. Upravo to je slučaj sa terminom 'retribucija' (retribution). Naime, u filozofskoj literaturi o kazni jako često se događa da se mnoge teorije nazivaju 'retributivnim teorijama kazne', kao i to da se vrlo široko i na krajnje višesmislen način upotrebljava termin 'retribucija'. Šta zapravo znači 'retribucija'? Da li sve teorije koje se klasifikuju kao retributivne zaista mogu da se ispravno okarakterišu na taj način? To su ključna pitanja na koja Džon Kotingem nastoji da odgovori u svom tekstu. Glavni cilj ovog rada je da se predstavi klasifikacija retributivnih teorija koju Kotingem izvodi, da se objasni njen značaj, kao i njeni eventualni nedostaci. Pokazaće se da je Kotingemova klasifikacija, uprkos nekim nedostacima i nedoslednostima, još uvek jedna od najtemeljnijih analiza retributivnih teorija kazne koja je napisana u okviru radova koji spadaju u filozofiju kazne., One of the most serious problems facing the analysis of philosophical arguments is the fat that some of the main terms in those arguments are ambiguous and vague. This is exactly the case with the term 'retribution'. Namely, in the philosophical literature about moral justification of punishment many quite dissimilar theories are often characterized as retributive theories of punishment. Also, the term 'retribution' is typically used in a very broad and imprecise way. What exactly is the meaning of the term 'retribution'? Is it the case that all the theories that are classified as retributive can be properly characterized in that way? These are the main questions that John Cottingham attempts to answer in his analysis of retributive theories of punishment. The main goal of this paper is to present Cottingham's classification of retributive theories, as well as to explain its significance and potential defects. I hope that in the course of this paper it will become clear that, despite some minor flaws and shortcomings, Cottingham's classification is still one the most thorough analysis of retributive theories of punishment, and that it is the best introduction to retributivism for anyone who is interested in the philosophy of punishment.",
publisher = "Srpsko filozofsko društvo, Beograd",
journal = "Theoria",
title = "Retributivne teorije kazne, Retributive theories of punishment",
pages = "59-37",
number = "2",
volume = "56",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1712"
}
Milevski, V.. (2013). Retributivne teorije kazne. in Theoria
Srpsko filozofsko društvo, Beograd., 56(2), 37-59.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1712
Milevski V. Retributivne teorije kazne. in Theoria. 2013;56(2):37-59.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1712 .
Milevski, Voin, "Retributivne teorije kazne" in Theoria, 56, no. 2 (2013):37-59,
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1712 .

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About REFF | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB
 

 

All of DSpaceInstitutions/communitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis institutionAuthorsTitlesSubjects

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About REFF | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB