RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      사형 처벌의 의미 = What The Ultimate Punishment Means

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A102737446

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      The pro and con of capital punishment has been hotly controversial in the discussion of legal philosophy. It seems no use in the discussion that pacifists are going to deny death penalty in the name of world peace, human rights, and civilized culture. It`s too emotional. As punishment theorists, utilitarians, either abolitionists or retentionists, are fictitious and factitious both in that they may not be factual in the factual sense and in that they may not be natural in the psychological sense. As opposed to utilitarians, retributionists, being natural as well as factual, are superior in that sense, but in that sense only, to say the least. They are almost helpless against the challenge of what is called (utilitarian) hybrids with some force. Therefore classical retributionism needs to be newly holistically remedied. Holistically extended retributionism demands that punishment as fair retribution to each offender should necessitate punishment with social benefit on the basis of the intimate link between punishment and society. We note that while retribution without social outcome would be empty, utility without retributive justice would be blind. We also note, more importantly, that either case cannot be possible nor desirable. It is time holistic retributionism for death punishment prevails.
      번역하기

      The pro and con of capital punishment has been hotly controversial in the discussion of legal philosophy. It seems no use in the discussion that pacifists are going to deny death penalty in the name of world peace, human rights, and civilized culture....

      The pro and con of capital punishment has been hotly controversial in the discussion of legal philosophy. It seems no use in the discussion that pacifists are going to deny death penalty in the name of world peace, human rights, and civilized culture. It`s too emotional. As punishment theorists, utilitarians, either abolitionists or retentionists, are fictitious and factitious both in that they may not be factual in the factual sense and in that they may not be natural in the psychological sense. As opposed to utilitarians, retributionists, being natural as well as factual, are superior in that sense, but in that sense only, to say the least. They are almost helpless against the challenge of what is called (utilitarian) hybrids with some force. Therefore classical retributionism needs to be newly holistically remedied. Holistically extended retributionism demands that punishment as fair retribution to each offender should necessitate punishment with social benefit on the basis of the intimate link between punishment and society. We note that while retribution without social outcome would be empty, utility without retributive justice would be blind. We also note, more importantly, that either case cannot be possible nor desirable. It is time holistic retributionism for death punishment prevails.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 장석일, "생명 존중 인권의 가치 충돌 - 신중한 접근 필요"

      2 이규태, "사형폐지 연합"

      3 이규태, "사형폐지 법안"

      4 이호중, "사형집행 재개, 무엇을 위한 것인가"

      5 고준승, "사형제에 대한 단상"

      6 윤종행, "사형제도와 인간의 존엄성" 법학연구원 13 (13): 79-95, 2003

      7 김지은, "사형제는 또 다른 형태의 살인 - 폐지 마땅"

      8 이경재, "사형제, 운영의 묘를"

      9 고은태, "사형제 합헌결정은 생명권에 대한 침해"

      10 김희진, "사형제 폐지 대세 - 한국의 선택은?"

      1 장석일, "생명 존중 인권의 가치 충돌 - 신중한 접근 필요"

      2 이규태, "사형폐지 연합"

      3 이규태, "사형폐지 법안"

      4 이호중, "사형집행 재개, 무엇을 위한 것인가"

      5 고준승, "사형제에 대한 단상"

      6 윤종행, "사형제도와 인간의 존엄성" 법학연구원 13 (13): 79-95, 2003

      7 김지은, "사형제는 또 다른 형태의 살인 - 폐지 마땅"

      8 이경재, "사형제, 운영의 묘를"

      9 고은태, "사형제 합헌결정은 생명권에 대한 침해"

      10 김희진, "사형제 폐지 대세 - 한국의 선택은?"

      11 이창영, "사형은 살인이다"

      12 선우정, "사형에 대한 일본의 관점"

      13 김철웅, "사형수"

      14 송호창, "사형 부추기는 정부"

      15 "법률신문사설, “사형제도 폐지보다는 정비를”"

      16 "법률신문사설, "법무부장관, 사형집행 조속히 해야""

      17 황필홍, "되갚는 정의로서의 사형제" 철학연구회 (72) : 243-271, 2006

      18 "경향신문사설, “사형제 합헌 결정, 그러나 대세는 폐지다”"

      19 "경향신문사설, "사형 보호감호제 - 정부 여당 시계는 거꾸로 가나""

      20 필립 티에보, "‘사형제 폐지’는 세계적 흐름"

      21 Bright, Stephen B, "Why the United States Will Join the Rest of the World in Abandoning Capital Punishment, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 152-182, 2004

      22 Pojman, Louis P, "Why the Death Penalty Is Morally Permissible, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 51-75, 2004

      23 Russell, Bertrand, "What I Believe" Routledge 2010

      24 Marquis, Joshua K, "Truth and Consequences: The Penalty of Death, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 117-151, 2004

      25 Kozinski, Alex, "Tinkering with Death, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 1-14, 2004

      26 Ezra, Ovadia, "The Withdrawal of Rights: Rights from a Different Perspective" Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

      27 Goldman, Alan H, "The Paradox of Punishment, In Punishment" Princeton University Press 30-46, 1995

      28 Hampton, Jean, "The Moral Education Theory of Punishment, In Punishment" Princeton University Press 112-142, 1995

      29 Feinberg, Joel, "The Expressive Function of Punishment, In Philosophy of Law" Wadsworth 761-771, 2004

      30 Rachels, James, "The Elements of Moral Philosophy, 6th ed" The McGraw-Hill Companies 2010

      31 Zimmerman, Paul R, "The Economics of Capital Punishment and Deterrence, In Handbook on the Economics of Crime" Edward Elgar 381-431, 2010

      32 Hook, Sidney, "The Death Sentence: Limited Use, In Life and Death: A Reader in Moral Problems" Wadsworth 389-390, 1999

      33 van den Haag, Ernest, "The Death Penalty: Pro and Con, In Life and Death: A Reader in Moral Problems" Wadsworth 391-394, 2000

      34 Hart, H.L.A, "The Concept of Law" Oxford University Press 1961

      35 Blattberg, Charles, "Taking Politics Seriously - but Not Too Seriously" 1-10, 2010

      36 van den Haag, Ernest, "Refuting Reiman and Nathanson, In Punishment" Princeton University Press 324-335, 1995

      37 황필홍, "Punishment as Equality" 한국아메리카학회 38 (38): 37-72, 2006

      38 Fletcher, George P, "Punishment and Responsibility, In A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory" Blackwell Publishing 514-523, 2003

      39 Hart, H.L.A, "Punishment and Responsibility" Oxford University Press 1968

      40 Ralws, J, "Political Liberalism" Columbia University Press 1993

      41 Tebbit, Mark, "Philosophy of Law: An Introduction" Routledge 2002

      42 Morris, Herbert, "Persons and Punishment, In The Social Organization of Law: Introductory Readings" Oxford University Press 472-479, 2010

      43 Bienen, Leigh Buchanan, "Murder and Its Consequences: Essays on Capital Punishment in America" Northwestern University Press 2010

      44 Ezra, Ovadia, "Moral Dilemmas in Real Life: Current Issues in Applied Ethics" Springer 2010

      45 "Mill's Speech before the British Parliament on April 21, 1868 in opposition to a Bill banning Capital Punishment proposed by Mr. Gilpin"

      46 Clark, Michael, "Mill on Capital Punishment - Retributive Overtones?" The Johns Hopkins University Press 42 (42): 327-332, 2004

      47 Murphy, Jeffrie G, "Marxism and Retribution, In Punishment" Princeton University Press 3-29, 1995

      48 Reiman, Jeffrey H, "Justice, Civilization, and the Death Penalty: Answering van den Haag, In Punishment" Princeton University Press 274-307, 1995

      49 Glossop, Ronald J, "Is Hume a "Classical Utilitarian"?" 2 (2): 1-16, 1976

      50 Salmon, Merrilee H, "Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, 2nd ed" Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1989

      51 Walton, Douglas, "Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach, 2nd ed" Cambridge University 2008

      52 Cassell, Paul G, "In Defense of the Death Penalty, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 183-217, 2004

      53 Ryan, George, "I Must Act, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 218-234, 2004

      54 Taylor, Charles, "Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers 2" Cambridge University Press 1990

      55 Taylor, Charles, "Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers 1" Cambridge University Press 1990

      56 Dahnke, Michael D, "Film, Art, and Filmart: An Introduction to Aesthetics Through Film" University Press of America 2007

      57 Kant, Immanuel, "Ethical Philosophy" Hackett Publishing Company 1988

      58 Hart, H.L.A, "Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy" Oxford University Press 1983

      59 Nathanson, Stephen, "Does It Matter if the Death Penalty Is Arbitrarily Administered?, In Punishment" Princeton University Press 308-323, 1995

      60 Jones, Sandra J, "Coalition Building in the Anti-Death Penalty Movement: Privileged Morality, Race Realities" Lexington Books 2010

      61 Stevenson, Bryan, "Close to Death: Reflections on Race and Capital Punishment in America, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 76-116, 2004

      62 Bedau, Hugo Adam, "Capital Punishment, In The Oxford Handbook of Practical Ethics" Oxford University Press 705-733, 2003

      63 Munson, Ronald, "Basics of Reasoning" Wadsworth 2001

      64 Bedau, Hugo Adam, "An Abolitionist's Survey of the Death Penalty in America Today, In Debating the Death Penalty" Oxford University Press 15-50, 2004

      65 Rawls, J, "A Theory of Justice" Oxford University Press 1971

      66 Morris, Herbert, "A Retributive Theory of Punishment, In Social and Political Philosophy: Contemporary Readings" Harcourt Brace & Company 853-860, 1999

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2026 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2014-02-24 학회명변경 영문명 : The Korean Ethics Studies Association -> The Korean Association of Ethics KCI등재
      2014-02-24 학술지명변경 외국어명 : Journal of Korean Ethics Studies -> Journal of Ethics KCI등재
      2013-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2008-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2006-12-20 학회명변경 한글명 : 한국국민윤리학회 -> 한국윤리학회 KCI등재
      2006-12-20 학술지명변경 한글명 : 국민윤리연구 -> 윤리연구
      외국어명 : 미등록 -> Journal of Korean Ethics Studies
      KCI등재
      2005-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2004-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2002-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.43 0.43 0.42
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.41 0.4 0.578 0.08
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼