Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, I defend and expand the Fortificationist Theory of Punishment (FTP). Second, I argue that this theory implies that non-consensual neurointerventions – interventions that act directly on one’s brain – are permissible. According to the FTP, punishment is ju...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Theofilopoulou, A
Format: Journal article
Published: Springer Netherlands 2019
_version_ 1797086850009006080
author Theofilopoulou, A
author_facet Theofilopoulou, A
author_sort Theofilopoulou, A
collection OXFORD
description The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, I defend and expand the Fortificationist Theory of Punishment (FTP). Second, I argue that this theory implies that non-consensual neurointerventions – interventions that act directly on one’s brain – are permissible. According to the FTP, punishment is justified as a way of ensuring that citizens who infringe their duty to demonstrate the reliability of their moral powers will thereafter be able to comply with it. I claim that the FTP ought to be expanded to include citizens’ interest in developing their moral powers. Thus, states must ensure that their citizens develop their moral reliability, not only because they must enforce their citizens’ compliance with certain duties, but also because states have the duty to maintain the conditions for stability and satisfy their citizens’ interest in developing their moral powers. According to this account of the FTP, if neurointerventions are the only or best way of ensuring that offenders can discharge their fortificational duties, states have strong reasons to provide these interventions.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T02:27:49Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:a63990ea-58d8-4477-b06f-48292ee7eb09
institution University of Oxford
last_indexed 2024-03-07T02:27:49Z
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:a63990ea-58d8-4477-b06f-48292ee7eb092022-03-27T02:45:43ZPunishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventionsJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:a63990ea-58d8-4477-b06f-48292ee7eb09Symplectic Elements at OxfordSpringer Netherlands2019Theofilopoulou, AThe purpose of this paper is twofold. First, I defend and expand the Fortificationist Theory of Punishment (FTP). Second, I argue that this theory implies that non-consensual neurointerventions – interventions that act directly on one’s brain – are permissible. According to the FTP, punishment is justified as a way of ensuring that citizens who infringe their duty to demonstrate the reliability of their moral powers will thereafter be able to comply with it. I claim that the FTP ought to be expanded to include citizens’ interest in developing their moral powers. Thus, states must ensure that their citizens develop their moral reliability, not only because they must enforce their citizens’ compliance with certain duties, but also because states have the duty to maintain the conditions for stability and satisfy their citizens’ interest in developing their moral powers. According to this account of the FTP, if neurointerventions are the only or best way of ensuring that offenders can discharge their fortificational duties, states have strong reasons to provide these interventions.
spellingShingle Theofilopoulou, A
Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions
title Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions
title_full Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions
title_fullStr Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions
title_full_unstemmed Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions
title_short Punishment as moral fortification and non-consensual neurointerventions
title_sort punishment as moral fortification and non consensual neurointerventions
work_keys_str_mv AT theofilopouloua punishmentasmoralfortificationandnonconsensualneurointerventions