The Soul of Punishment: Why Do We Punish?

Once the state's legitimacy to punish is established, the next philosophical question arises: what is the purpose of punishment? Here, we are faced with two main poles of thought that have shaped the debate for centuries.

1. Retributive Theory (Deontological): Punishment as Absolute Justice

This view, rooted in the thought of Immanuel Kant, sees punishment not as a means to achieve other goals, but as an end in itself. Punishment is a commensurate retribution (just desert") for the wrong that has been done. Someone is punished because hedeservesit. Philosophically, retributivism values the perpetrator of a crime as a rational moral agent with free will (free will"). By committing a crime, he has made a choice. Punishing him is a way of respecting that choice by imposing fair consequences. For Kant, not punishing the perpetrator of a crime is a form of injustice, because it means denying his moral responsibility. This view is backward-looking (backward-looking"); the focus is on the act that has occurred, without having to think about its impact in the future. The ancient adagelex talionis("an eye for an eye") is an echo of this retributive spirit.