Campbell, T. Axiological Retributivism and the Desert Neutrality Paradox. Philosophies 2022, 7, 80. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies7040080 Abstract: According to axiological retributivism, people canan outcome in which someone gets what she deserves, even if it is bad for her, can thereby haveintrinsic positive value. A question seldom asked is how axiological retributivism should deal withcomparisons of outcomes that differ with respect to the number and identities of deserving agents.Attempting to answer this question exposes a problem for axiological retributivism that parallels awell-known problem in population axiology introduced by John Broome. The problem for axiologicalretributivism is that it supports the existence of a range of negative wellbeing levels such that if adeserving person comes into existence at any of these levels, the resulting outcome is neither betternor worse with respect to desert. However, the existence of such a range is inconsistent with a setof very plausible axiological claims. I call this the desert neutrality paradox. After introducing theparadox, I consider several possible responses to it. I suggest that one reasonable response, thoughperhaps not the only one, is to reject axiological retributivism.

Criminal Law and Philosophy, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 125-142. Abstract Retributivism may seem wholly uninterested in the fit between penal policy and public opinion, but on one rendition of the theory, h

Research seminar with Matthew Adler, Duke UniversityREGISTERAbstract The philosophical literature on consequentialism regularly distinguishes between “person-affecting” and “impersonal” moral justifica

Criminal Law & Philosophy Abstract The aim of the paper is to investigate how retributivists should respond to the apparent tension between moral desert and proportionality in punishment. I argue th

Daniel Hausman: What is a Fair Allocation of Healthcare?

Research seminar with Daniel M. Hausman, Research Professor at Center for Population-Level Bioethics at Rutgers University. This seminar is arranged by the Institute for Futures Studies and Center for

in Tonry, M. (ed.) Of One-eyed and Toothless Miscreants: Making the Punishment Fit the Crime? Oxford: Oxford University Press. Abstract Conflicts between relative and absolute proportionality are an imp

ATTENTION!This seminar will be held at 15.00-16.45 (CET)/9.00-10.45 (EST) Register Research seminar with Daniel M. Hausman, Research Professor at Center for Population-Level Bioethics at Rutgers Univers

Gustaf Arrhenius

I am the Director of the Institute for Futures Studies. I am also Professor of Practical Philosophy. I received my Ph.D. in philosophy from University of Toronto and my FD in practical philosophy from

Current and Recent Projects The Mimir Institute for Long Term Futures Studies Climate Ethics and Future Generations Sustainable Population in the Time of Climate Change Anxieties of Democracy The Boundary