Resultant Moral Luck and Criminal Law

Nobahar, Rahim; Khatteshab, Mohammad Reza

doi:10.22096/law.2019.36881

Resultant Moral Luck and Criminal Law

Document Type : Scientific Paper

Authors

Rahim Nobahar ¹

Mohammad Reza Khatteshab ²

¹ Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University

² Master in Private Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University.

10.22096/law.2019.36881

Abstract

Moral luck, which is a new concept in moral philosophy, challenges our ordinary moral evaluation. According to human's moral intuition, people are only evaluated for their controllable behaviors. However, while people have no control over results of their behaviors, results are effective in our moral judgments. This issue, in its turn, raises an essential question in criminal law: are people responsible for their behaviors in cases they have no control over the results of their behaviors? While theorists who agree with moral resultant luck are trying to theorize the existing and prominent practices in penal codes, others who oppose this idea attempt to neutralize the role of results in criminal responsibility. As a result, they believe that criminal legal systems should impose equal punishment on offenders who commit the same conducts regardless of different results as far as they simply stem from moral luck. Consequently, if the proponents' arguments in favor of moral resultant luck are persuasive, the prominent approach in criminal law would be established. On the other hand, if the opponents' opinions against moral resultant luck are stronger, then significant changes would happen in penal code and criminal titles.

Keywords

Moral Luck

Criminal Responsibility

Punishment

Desert

Deserve

الف- فارسی
1. 1. اردبیلی، محمدعلی (1393)، حقوق جزای عمومی، جلد1، چاپ سی‌و‌هشتم، تهران: میزان.
2. 2. خوانساری، محمد (1378)، منطق صوری، چاپ‌سی‌و‌هفتم، تهران: آگاه.
3. 3. زاگزبسکی، لیندا (1392)، معرفت شناسی، ترجمۀ کاوه بهبهانی، چاپ‌اول، تهران: نشر نی.
4. 4. زمانی، محسن (1391)، آشنایی به معرفت‌شناسی، چاپ‌اول، تهران: هرمس.
5. 5. صانعی دره‌بیدی، منوچهر (1378)، فلسفه اخلاق و مبانی رفتار، چاپ‌دوم، تهران: سروش.
6. 6. علیا، مسعود (1391)، فرهنگ توصیفی فلسفه اخلاق، چاپ‌اول، تهران: هرمس.
7. 7. کاپلستون، فردریک (1382)، تاریخ فلسفه: از بنتام تا راسل، ترجمۀ بهاءالدین خرمشاهی، جلد8، چاپ‌سوم، تهران: سروش و شرکت انتشارات علمی فرهنگی.
8. 8. کاپلستون، فردریک (1387)، تاریخ فلسفه: از ولف تا کانت، ترجمه اسماعیل سعادت و منوچهر بزرگمهر، جلد6، چاپ‌چهارم، تهران: شرکت انتشارات علمی فرهنگی و انتشارات سروش.
9. 9. کاتینگهام، جان (1384)، «فلسفه مجازات»، ترجمۀ ابراهیم باطنی و محسن برهانی، مجله حقوق اسلامی، دورۀ 1، شماره4، صص170-147.
10. 10. کانت، ایمانوئل (1369)، بنیاد مابعدالطبیعه اخلاق، ترجمۀ حمید عنایت و علی قیصری، چاپ‌اول، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشارات خوارزمی.
11. 11. میرمحمد صادقی، حسین (1393)، جرایم علیه اشخاص، چاپ‌شانزدهم، تهران: میزان.
12. 12. میرمحمد صادقی، حسین (1390)، تحلیل مبانی حقوق جزای عمومی، چاپ‌اول، تهران: جنگل.
13. 13. نلکین، دانا (1393)، «بخت اخلاقی»، دانشنامۀ فلسفی استنفورد، تهران: ققنوس.
14. 14. نوربها، رضا (1388)، زمینۀ حقوق جزای عمومی، چاپ‌بیست‌و‌هفتم، تهران: گنج دانش.
15. 15. هوفه، اتفرید (1392الف)، «امر مطلق کانت به مثابه ملاک اخلاق مداری»، قانون اخلاقی در درون من، ترجمۀ رضا مصیبی، چاپ‌اول، تهران: نشر نی.
16. 16. هوفه، اتفرید (1392ب)، «چه باید بکنم»، قانون اخلاقی در درون من، ترجمۀ رضا مصیبی، چاپ‌اول، تهران: نشر نی.
17. 17. یزدیان‌جعفری، جعفر (1387)، «اصل تناسب جرم و مجازات؛ چرائی و چگونگی آن»، نامۀ مفید، دورۀ 14، شماره67، صص 156-139.
18. 18. انصاری، مرتضی (1424ق)، فرائد الأُصول، جلد1، قم: مجمع الفکر الإسلامی.
19. 19. جبعی عاملی، زین‌الدین (1398-1386)، الروضة البهیة فی شرح اللمعة الدمشقیة، جلد10، تحقیق: سید محمد کلانتر، نجف اشرف: منشورات الجامعة النجف الدینیة.
  1. 20. Alexander, Larry & Ferzan, Kimberly Kessler (2009). Crime and Culpability: A Theory of Criminal Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. 21. Andre, Judith (1993). “Nagel, Williams and Moral Luck”, in: Statman, Daniel (ed.), Moral luck, New York: State University of New York Press.
  3. 22. Ashworth, Andrew (1987-1988). “Criminal Attempts and the Role of Resulting Harm under the Code, and in The Common Law”, Rutgers Law Journal, Vol.19, pp.725-772.
  4. 23. Bentham, Jeremy (2000). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, Kitchener: Batoche Books.
  5. 24. Blackburn, Simon (1996). The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  6. 25. Burkhardt, Bjorn (1986). “Is There a Rational Justification for Punishing an Accomplished Crime More Severely Than an Attempted Crime?”, Brigham Young University Law Review, Vol.1986, issue 3, pp.553-571.
  7. 26. Crocker, Lawrence (1992). “Justice in Criminal Liability: Decriminalizing Harmless Attempts”, Ohio State Law Journal, Vol.53, No. 4, pp.1057-1110.
  8. 27. Davis, Michael (1986). “Why Attempts Deserve Less Punishment Than Complete Crimes?”, Law and Philosophy, Vol.5, No.1, pp.1-32.
  9. 28. Duff, Antony (1990a). “Auction, Lotteries, and The Punishment of Attempts”, Law and Philosophy, Vol. 9, No.1, pp.1-37.
  10. 29. Duff, Antony (1990b). Intention, Agency and Criminal Liability, United Kingdom: Basil Blackwell Pub.
  11. 30. Duff, Antony (2009). “Legal and Moral Responsibility”, Philosophy Compass, Vol. 4, Issue. 6, pp.978-986.
  12. 31. Enoch, David (2008). “Luck between Morality, Law, And Justice”, Theoretical Inquiries in Law, Vol. 9, issue 1, pp.23-59.
  13. 32. Enoch, David (2010). “Moral Luck and the Law”, PhilosophyCompass, Vol. 5, Issue. 1, pp.42-54.
  14. 33. Feinberg, Joel (1995). “Equal Punishment for Failed Attempts: Some Bad but Instructive Arguments against It”, Arizona Law Review, Vol.37, pp.117-133.
  15. 34. Feinberg, Joel (1990). Harmless Wrong-Doing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  16. 35. Feinberg, Joel (2000). Rethinking Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  17. 36. Hart, Herbert (2008). Responsibility and Punishment, Second Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  18. 37. Herman, Barbara (1995). “Feinberg on Luck And Failed Attempts”, Arizona Law Review, Vol.37, pp. 143-149.
  19. 38. Kadish, Sanford (1994). “Foreword: The Criminal Law And the Luck of the Draw”, The Journal Of Criminal Law And Criminology, Vol. 84, No. 4, pp.679-702.
  20. 39. Katz, Leo (2000). “Why the Successful Assassin is More Wicked than Unsuccessful One”, California Law Review, The Morality Of Criminal Law: A Symposium In Honor Of Professor Sandy Kadish, Vol. 88, No. 3, pp.791-812.
  21. 40. Kessler, Kimberly D. (1994). “The Role of Luck in the Criminal Law”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 142, pp. 2183-2237.
  22. 41. Latus, Andre (1988). Avoiding Luck: The Problem of Moral Luck and Its Significance, Canada: National Library of Canada.
  23. 42. Levy, Ken (2005). “The Solution to the Problem of Outcome Luck: Why Harm Is Just as Punishable as the Wrongful Action that Causes It”, Law and Philosophy, Vol.24, Issue 3, pp.263-303.
  24. 43. Lewis, Davis (1989). “The Punishment That Leaves Something to Chance”, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.53-67.
  25. 44. Moore, Michael (1997). Placing Blame: A Theory of the Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  26. 45. Morse, Stephen (2004). “Reason, Results, and Criminal Law”, University of Illinois Law Review, Vol. 2004, No. 2, pp.363-444.
  27. 46. Nagel, Thomas (1993). "Moral Luck", in: Statman, Daniel, (ed.), Moral Luck, New York: State University of New York Press.
  28. 47. Richards, Norvin (1993). “Luck and Deserts”, in: Statman, Daniel (ed.), Moral luck, New York: State University of New York Press.
  29. 48. Schulhofer, Stephen J. (1974). “Harm and Punishment: A Critique of Emphasis on the Results of Conduct in the Criminal Law”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 122, No. 6, pp.1497-1607.
  30. 49. Steven, Sverdlik (1988). “Crime and Moral Luck”, American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol.25, No.1, pp.79-86.
  31. 50. Williams, Bernard (1981). Moral Luck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ب- عربی

ج- لاتین