retributivists

retributivists argue that punishment is morally justified when it corresponds to the severity of the offense.

retributivists believe that justice requires offenders to receive punishment proportional to their crimes.

retributivists maintain that the moral worth of punishment lies in its desert rather than its consequences.

retributivists assert that innocent people should never be punished, regardless of potential benefits.

retributivists emphasize that retribution serves as a necessary condition for moral equilibrium in society.

retributivists contend that proportional punishment respects the autonomy and dignity of offenders.

retributivists reject utilitarian justifications for punishment, insisting on desert-based approaches instead.

retributivists distinguish between retributivism and other theories by focusing on desert rather than social utility.

retributivists appeal to the lex talionis principle as foundational to their theory of punishment.

retributivists rely on intuitive moral judgments about fairness when defending their position.

retributivists criticize consequentialist approaches for failing to honor the intrinsic desert of offenders.

retributivists defend the death penalty as a just desert for the most heinous crimes.