{"id":{"repo_id":"cape-town","oai_identifier":"oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/14079"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cape-town/oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/14079","repository":{"repo_id":"cape-town","name":"University of Cape Town","base_url":"https://open.uct.ac.za/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Replacing punishment: the ethics of alternatives to legal punishment","abstract":"The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze the morality of putative alternatives to punishment. I will explore what makes them non-punitive, define them, and analyze whether they can be justified. The structure of the dissertation is as follows. The first chapter investigates the concept of punishment. I will defend a definition of punishment: authorized, retributive, intended harm. Then I will proceed to explain the need to justify punishment, and give an overview of how it is at least plausible to believe that no justification has yet succeeded. I will end the chapter with a brief discussion of the requirements of a criminal justice system. The second chapter is about money. I will scrutinize whether the theory of 'pure restitution' may completely replace punishment. I will argue that it cannot, and furthermore I will caution against the widespread use of mandatory monetary restitution. I will also provide a positive argument for the state's duty to provide compensation to victims of violent crime. The third chapter brings in the true heavyweights for non-punitive interventions: offender rehabilitation and offender incapacitation. After defining them, explaining why they are non-punitive, and defending justifications for them, I will conclude that they provide the most substantive opportunities for the state to shift its criminal justice burden s away from punishment. In the fourth chapter I will explore rituals: restorative justice conferences, trial and therapeutic jurisprudence, re-entry ceremonies and apologies. My argument for a minimally punitive regime will come together in the last chapter. In doing so I will explain why a state must rely on punishment to a small but crucial extent, and that punishment can be minimized drastically in comparison to today's practices. I will also address concerns regarding security and deterrence.","abstract_html":"The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze the morality of putative alternatives to punishment. I will explore what makes them non-punitive, define them, and analyze whether they can be justified. The structure of the dissertation is as follows. The first chapter investigates the concept of punishment. I will defend a definition of punishment: authorized, retributive, intended harm. Then I will proceed to explain the need to justify punishment, and give an overview of how it is at least plausible to believe that no justification has yet succeeded. I will end the chapter with a brief discussion of the requirements of a criminal justice system. The second chapter is about money. I will scrutinize whether the theory of 'pure restitution' may completely replace punishment. I will argue that it cannot, and furthermore I will caution against the widespread use of mandatory monetary restitution. I will also provide a positive argument for the state's duty to provide compensation to victims of violent crime. The third chapter brings in the true heavyweights for non-punitive interventions: offender rehabilitation and offender incapacitation. After defining them, explaining why they are non-punitive, and defending justifications for them, I will conclude that they provide the most substantive opportunities for the state to shift its criminal justice burden s away from punishment. In the fourth chapter I will explore rituals: restorative justice conferences, trial and therapeutic jurisprudence, re-entry ceremonies and apologies. My argument for a minimally punitive regime will come together in the last chapter. In doing so I will explain why a state must rely on punishment to a small but crucial extent, and that punishment can be minimized drastically in comparison to today's practices. I will also address concerns regarding security and deterrence.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Gallagher, Scott"],"institution":"Department of Philosophy","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Benatar, David"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013","date_published":"2013","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:22:37Z","subjects":[],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14079","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Benatar, David"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Gallagher, Scott"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2015-09-25T07:18:58Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2015-09-25T07:18:58Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2013"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["Department of Philosophy"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Cape Town"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Master Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["MA"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14079"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze the morality of putative alternatives to punishment. I will explore what makes them non-punitive, define them, and analyze whether they can be justified. The structure of the dissertation is as follows. The first chapter investigates the concept of punishment. I will defend a definition of punishment: authorized, retributive, intended harm. Then I will proceed to explain the need to justify punishment, and give an overview of how it is at least plausible to believe that no justification has yet succeeded. I will end the chapter with a brief discussion of the requirements of a criminal justice system. The second chapter is about money. I will scrutinize whether the theory of 'pure restitution' may completely replace punishment. I will argue that it cannot, and furthermore I will caution against the widespread use of mandatory monetary restitution. I will also provide a positive argument for the state's duty to provide compensation to victims of violent crime. The third chapter brings in the true heavyweights for non-punitive interventions: offender rehabilitation and offender incapacitation. After defining them, explaining why they are non-punitive, and defending justifications for them, I will conclude that they provide the most substantive opportunities for the state to shift its criminal justice burden s away from punishment. In the fourth chapter I will explore rituals: restorative justice conferences, trial and therapeutic jurisprudence, re-entry ceremonies and apologies. My argument for a minimally punitive regime will come together in the last chapter. In doing so I will explain why a state must rely on punishment to a small but crucial extent, and that punishment can be minimized drastically in comparison to today's practices. I will also address concerns regarding security and deterrence."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Replacing punishment: the ethics of alternatives to legal punishment"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Benatar, David"],"dc:creator":["Gallagher, Scott"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2015-09-25T07:18:58Z"],"dc:date.available":["2015-09-25T07:18:58Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2013"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze the morality of putative alternatives to punishment. I will explore what makes them non-punitive, define them, and analyze whether they can be justified. The structure of the dissertation is as follows. The first chapter investigates the concept of punishment. I will defend a definition of punishment: authorized, retributive, intended harm. Then I will proceed to explain the need to justify punishment, and give an overview of how it is at least plausible to believe that no justification has yet succeeded. I will end the chapter with a brief discussion of the requirements of a criminal justice system. The second chapter is about money. I will scrutinize whether the theory of 'pure restitution' may completely replace punishment. I will argue that it cannot, and furthermore I will caution against the widespread use of mandatory monetary restitution. I will also provide a positive argument for the state's duty to provide compensation to victims of violent crime. The third chapter brings in the true heavyweights for non-punitive interventions: offender rehabilitation and offender incapacitation. After defining them, explaining why they are non-punitive, and defending justifications for them, I will conclude that they provide the most substantive opportunities for the state to shift its criminal justice burden s away from punishment. In the fourth chapter I will explore rituals: restorative justice conferences, trial and therapeutic jurisprudence, re-entry ceremonies and apologies. My argument for a minimally punitive regime will come together in the last chapter. In doing so I will explain why a state must rely on punishment to a small but crucial extent, and that punishment can be minimized drastically in comparison to today's practices. I will also address concerns regarding security and deterrence."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14079"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:publisher.department":["Department of Philosophy"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Cape Town"],"dc:title":["Replacing punishment: the ethics of alternatives to legal punishment"],"dc:type":["Master Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Masters"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["MA"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:22:37Z"}