Transcript Criminal Justice and Moral Philosophy


Ethics of Virtue (Aristotle)



Natural Law



Measures an act’s “goodness” according to its consequences
Purpose to produce the greatest benefit for all concerned - the best ratio of good to evil
Ethics of care



Concerned only with the nature of an act, not its consequences
“Categorical imperative”: Could an act become a rule of nature? If so, it is good
Utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill)



Moral guidelines for how to live one’s life. God’s will is beyond question.
Ethical formalism (Kant)



Morality is part of the natural order; there are universal rights and wrongs
What is good is what conforms to the “natural order of things” (e.g. preserving life)
Religion


People not born good but become good by following a moral exemplar
Focus on character - not acts
What is good meets the needs of everyone. But the individual is never sacrificed.
Emphasis on empathy and compassion
Situational ethics


Attempt to reconcile relativism and absolutism
Apply basic principles of right and wrong; takes into account effects on all concerned
Justice is not the same as “good”
 “Justice” seeks fairness in human relations.
▪ Mediates between tendencies to act
selfishly and generously.
 A sense of justice may be an evolutionary trait
▪ “Grudgers,” fooled once, use justice to keep
“cheaters” from wiping out “suckers,” and
thus wiping out themselves
 Components of justice
 Fairness - equal treatment
 Equality - everyone shares
 Impartiality - without bias (“blind justice”)

Concerned with allocating society’s resources
 Economic goods (income, property)
 Opportunities (education, social welfare, etc.)
 Recognition
 Criteria
 Need, merit, performance, work, ability,
rank, legal entitlement, etc.
 Theories of allocation
 Egalitarian: equal shares for all
 Marxist: Need above everything else
 Libertarian: Government should not be involved in allocation
▪ Productive contribution most important factor
 Utilitarian: Seeks to maximize benefits for individuals and society
▪ Consider both entitlements and need






Combines egalitarian and rights-based concepts
Equal distribution, tweaked as necessary to
help the disadvantaged
 Includes everything: liberty, opportunity, wealth, income
“Veil of ignorance”
 Decision-makers must make themselves purposefully “ignorant”
about their own social position so they will not be influenced by
how their distributive decisions may affect them
Criticisms
 Veil of ignorance not enough to counter selfishness
 Giving advantages to the poor de-incentivizes others
“Kantian” (rule-based) and utilitarian
 Bias for underdog supposedly benefits everyone in long run
Identifies “fair” or “appropriate” punishment
Retributive approach
 Theory of balance: criminal must suffer pain
proportional to the victim’s
▪ Lex talionis: “eye for an eye”
▪ Lex salica: Allows compensation - money &/or atonement
 Methods include corporal punishment, imprisonment, fines
 Utilitarian approach
 Seeks greatest good for all concerned
 Hedonistic calculus (Jeremy Bentham)
▪ Calibrate punishment to make crime unrewarding
▪ Proportionality  deterrence (not balance)


Legal system that decides on and
administers punishment
 Our system is based on “due process”
 Rules-based decision-making approach
▪ Process required before rights can be abridged
 Components
▪ Notice of charges
▪ Hearing before a neutral party
▪ Right to cross-examine and present evidence
▪ Formal statement of findings
▪ Right to counsel and to appeal
 Rules should not trump basic fairness
 Supreme Court allowed for extension of time to file appeal in
certain cases (Holland v. Florida)






Focuses on needs of all concerned
 Victims, offenders and communities are all a part of the process
Comparison
 Retributive justice: Who did it? Which laws were broken? What
should the punishment be?
 Restorative justice: What is the harm? How
can it be repaired? Who should do it?
Common types
 Victim-offender mediation conferences
 Community boards for youthful offenders
Community justice (a type of restorative justice)
 Peacemaking approach uses local leaders, citizen participation
Issues
 Victims may feel pressured to forgive
 Less due process for offenders
Characteristics of unjust laws (Boss)
 Degrading to humans
 Discriminate against groups
 Enacted by unrepresentative authorities
 Unjustly applied
 Unjust laws can only be defended under utilitarianism
 Ticking time-bomb scenario
 Examples
 Internment of persons of Japanese ancestry during WW-II
 Extraordinary rendition and Guantanamo
 Harsh interrogation techniques
 Waterboarding

Old explanations for how people acquire moral ideas
 “Blank slate” (tabula rasa): All is learned
 “Noble savage”: We are naturally altruistic; society makes us evil
 “Ghost in the machine”: Mind and body are separate; there is a
consciousness apart from the physical
 Biological factors
 Genetics: Shermer claims that values such as sympathy & fairness are
evolutionary; humans with such traits are more likely to survive
 Sex differences: Males have more serious behavioral disorders as
children, are more antisocial, and commit more serious offenses
 Frontal lobe development and injury: Frontal lobe involved in feelings
of empathy, shame and moral reasoning
▪ Frontal lobe damage associated with impulsivity, lack of tact,
inability to follow instructions, decreased attention span

Morals, values and behaviors are created by
humans and acquired through learning
 Learning happens two ways
 Modeling: Acquired from people one admires
 Reinforcement: Rewarded behaviors are repeated
and eventually become permanent
 We are actively involved in constructing the
meaning of rewards
 As one ages, rewards and sanctions can be replaced by symbolic
and internal controls (we call it a “conscience”)
 Self-regulation: good conduct is encouraged by anticipating
sanctions for poor behavior and the bad feelings that would arise
 “Self-efficacy”: feeling competent and confident is an especially
powerful reinforcer.

Persons mature physically, cognitively and
emotionally
 Kohlberg’s theory of moral development
 Stages 1 & 2 - pre-conventional: egoistic motivated by personal interests. In time
self-interest expands to include others.
Goal to avoid punishment.
 Stages 3 & 4 - conventional: people see
themselves as members of society. Learn rules and accept
responsibilities. Strive to define themselves as “good.”
 Stages 5 & 6 - post-conventional: social contract orientation,
and beyond. People judge laws and conventions according to
universal principles and in their historical context.

Do ethical beliefs affect one’s behavior?
 “Recognition” paper-and-pencil tests
 Measure knowledge and agreement with moral principles
▪ Moral responses associated with religiosity, females, older age
▪ Negative responses in organizations where misbehavior
tolerated or codes of conduct don’t exist
 Making decisions - rational v. emotional
 Hard to control the subjective, emotional component
 Busy, stressed workers more likely to act unethically because
brain’s capacity to rationally decide is overloaded
 Danger: self-regulation can be turned off (Bandura)
 Moral justification (end justifies means,) displacement and/or
diffusion of responsibility, dehumanization, distort consequences,
euphemistically label (“control” instead of “hit.”)

Police ethics training
 Usually pre-service, four hours or less
 Off-duty conduct, falsifying reports, excessive force, bribes and
gratuities, false testimony, failure to report misconduct, etc.
 In a 2010 survey chiefs felt that focus should shift from rules to
shared values and problem-solving
 Leadership
 Leaders should foster relationships with employees to encourage
modeling and identification with organization’s values
 Ineffective leaders are arrogant, focused on self, closed-minded
 Effective leaders have integrity, a work ethic, superior
communications skills and genuine concern for their employees
 Effective leaders in law enforcement must also have an overriding
concern with public service
