About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

16 Yale J. Health Pol'y L. & Ethics 289 (2016)
An Evidence-Based Objection to Retributive Justice

handle is hein.journals/yjhple16 and id is 301 raw text is: NOTE An Evidence-Based Objection to Retributive Justice Brian T.M. Mammarella Abstract: Advancements in neuroscience and related fields are beginning to show, with increasing clarity, that certain human behaviors stem from uncontrolled, mechanistic causes. These discoveries beg the question: If a given behavior results from some combination of biological predispositions, neurological circumstances, and environmental influences, is that action unwilled and therefore absolved of all attributions of credit, blame, and responsibility? A number of scholars in law and neuroscience who answer yes have considered how the absence of free will should impact criminal law's willingness to justify punishments on the basis of retribution, with some arguing that criminal law ought to dispense with retributive justice because the concept of blameworthiness is out of touch with scientific reality. This Note posits a more practical reason for reform by reviewing available empirics on the way people perceive human agency. The research suggests that as the science of human agency becomes increasingly vivid and reductionistic, laypeople will become proportionally less willing to attribute blame, and these shifting societal intuitions will ultimately diminish criminal law's moral credibility. The practical effects of low moral credibility might include diminished compliance, cooperation, and acquiescence with criminal laws, as well as increased general deviance. Importantly, this Note observes that these effects will likely manifest even if people retain a belief in free will. Further, ontological reality plays no part in this Note's argument; whether we in fact have free will is irrelevant. This Note instead contributes to the discourse by highlighting the implications of oncoming shifts in lay conceptions of both particular behaviors and the natural world writ large. * J.D., 2015, University of Virginia School of Law; B.A., 2012, College of William & Mary. I am indebted to Professors Barbara Spellman and Richard Bonnie for their helpful insights, guidance, and criticisms; Professor Paul Sheldon Davies, whose seminars inspired this Note; the editorial staff of the Yale Journal ofHealth Policy, Law & Ethics for their input and thoughtful review; and Ben Carper, for being the sounding board against whom ideas herein reverberated. 289

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most