02/06/2026
O Centro de Ética, Política e Sociedade (CEPS) promove, no próximo dia 9 de junho, às 16h, um seminário intitulado “Retributivism in the philosophy of punishment”.
A sessão será proferida pelo Doutor Mitchell Berman (Penn Carey Law School, University of Pennsylvania).
📅 9 de junho de 2026
🕓 16h
🌐 Online (via Zoom): https://zoom.us/j/95430963757?pwd=Xqy6SFSSl0c24ztaF02Bng8Szo7q8P.1
📢 CEPS Seminar / Mitchell Berman (Penn Carey Law, University of Pennsylvania)
"Retributivism in the philosophy of punishment"
📅 Tuesday, June 9
⌚️ 16.00 Lisbon time
📍 Online
https://zoom.us/j/95430963757?pwd=Xqy6SFSSl0c24ztaF02Bng8Szo7q8P.1
Abstract. In the Anglophone tradition, at least, there are two main proposed justifications for the infliction of state punishment: because the offender deserves it (retributivism), and because the infliction is expected to yield net good consequences (consequentialism), especially but not exclusively through the mechanisms of general and specific deterrence. I believe that many factors contribute to the justifiability of punishment. That makes me a pluralist about punishment’s justification. I also believe that an offender’s desert counts among the factors that contribute to the justifiability of punishment. That makes me a retributivist. I’m a pluralist retributivist. Or a retributivist pluralist. Although I lean retributivist, I’m not confident or complacent about it. Many or most contemporary philosophers who work in normative ethics or political philosophy believe that retributivism is barbaric and indefensible. And I’m not sure they’re wrong. In my remarks, I’ll identify what I believe are the greatest challenges facing retributivists and will sketch how I’m disposed to meet them in working out the view I call ‘prospect retributivism’. The seminar will be based on the chapter ‘Retribuitivism’ from the recently published The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Punishment (DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197750506.013.3) on punishment theory. Additional published articles and book chapters on retribuitivism by pfor. Berman are available here: https://www.law.upenn.edu/faculty/mitchber
Bio. Mitchell Berman, Leon Meltzer Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy and Co-Director of the Institute of Law and Philosophy at the Penn Carey Law, university of Pennsylvania, writes and teaches in American constitutional law and theory, philosophy of criminal law, general jurisprudence, and philosophy of sport. His contributions to these diverse fields include a novel nonoriginalist theory of American constitutional interpretation, a new positivist account of legal content, and an original retributivist justification for criminal punishment. He also claims to have solved the paradox of blackmail, the mystery of unconstitutional conditions, and the age-old puzzle of whether referees should “swallow the whistle” in crunch time. Berman’s many articles and book chapters on these and other topics have appeared, or are forthcoming, in the leading peer-reviewed journals in his fields, including Ethics, Noûs, Philosophy & Phenomenological Research, Legal Theory, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Law & Philosophy, Criminal Law & Philosophy, and Journal of Philosophy of Sport; in prominent student-edited law reviews including University of Pennsylvania Law Review, University of Chicago Law Review, Michigan Law Review, California Law Review, Texas Law Review, Notre Dame Law Review, Virginia Law Review, NYU Law Review, Duke Law Journal, and Georgetown Law Journal; and in edited volumes published by Oxford, Cambridge, and Routledge.
