学术资讯丨比较哲学工作坊第四十四讲：惩罚或治疗？——一种儒家刑事正义观念

•

Organizer

Topic

Speaker

Moderator

Time

VooV

When someone commits a crime, the first thing, if not the only thing, that comes into our mind is often to punish the person. Philosophers have thus been keen to develop theories to justify such punishment. Generally speaking, there are two dominant theories. The consequentialist theory holds that punishment is just if it can serve the function to deter the criminal, and other persons, from committing the same crime again in the future. The retributive theory aims to return to the criminal the exact same amount (not more nor less) of harm the criminal has brought to their victims through their criminal activities. Confucianism, however, regards a criminal as someone who is sick, although not externally (physically) but internally. So just as when a person is sick physically, the first thing we need to do is not to punish the person but to help the patient cure the disease, when a person commits a crime, the first thing we need to do cannot be to punish the person but to help the criminal heal their heart-mind that is harmed. That is why Confucianism pays so much attention to moral education, which can be done in multiple ways, including sending the criminals into jail. Since jail sentence here is served not as a way of punishment but as a way of moral education (just as a surgery on a patient is not punishment but a way of curing), if such jail time is indeed needed as a way of moral healing, it must be preceded, accompanied, and followed by other ways of moral education, including moral persuasion and, more importantly, moral exemplification. This Confucian view has often been characterized as a rehabilitational conception of criminal justice, one common objection to which is that it is concerned more about criminals than their victims. The Confucian response to it is that when the criminal’s heart-mind is healed, they will not only not commit the same crime again in the future (the primary concerns of the consequentialist theory of punishment) but will also do things to undo the harm they brought to their victims, and make compensation to their victims, as far as it is possible (the primary concerns of the retributive theory of punishment).

•

主　办

主　题

主　讲

主　持

时　间

地　点

当一个人犯了罪，我们首先想到的（如果不是只想到）往往是惩罚那个人。 因此，哲学家们一直热衷于提出理论来为惩罚辩护。 总的来说，主流理论有两种。 后果主义认为如果惩罚应起到威慑作用，使犯罪者和他人将来不再犯罪，那么它就是正义的。 报应理论旨在向犯罪者（不多也不少地）精确返还其在犯罪活动中对受害者造成的伤害。 然而，儒家认为犯罪者虽然在身体性的外在层面没有生病，但却在内在层面生病了。 因故，正如当一个人身体生病时，我们需要做的第一件事不是惩罚这个人，而是治疗他的疾病，当一个人犯了罪，我们需要做的第一件事不是惩罚这个人，而是帮他治愈他那受损的“心”（heart-mind）。 这也是为什么儒家尤其重视道德教育，而道德教育可以有多种方式，包括将犯罪者关进监狱。 因为，判处监禁在此不是作为一种惩罚的方式，而是一种道德教育的方式（就如同给一个病人做手术不是惩罚，而是一种治疗方式）。 如果确实需要以一段时间的监禁来作为道德治疗的方式，包括道德劝导以及更加重要的道德示范等其他方式的道德教育必须先行于、伴随于、紧接着它。 这种儒家观点常被认为是一种“恢复式”（rehabilitational）的刑事正义观念，并且一个常见的反对意见是它更关注犯罪者，而非受害者。 对此，儒家的回应是，当犯罪者的“心”被治愈，他们不仅将来不会再犯同样的罪（这是后果主义惩罚理论的主要关切），还会做出行动来消除他们给受害者造成的伤害，并尽可能补偿受害者（这是报应主义惩罚理论的主要关切）。