The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection
Fuente:
Redalyc
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo científico |
| Lenguaje: | en |
| Publicado: |
Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
2010
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1876463532951732224 |
|---|---|
| author | Miroslav IMBRISEVIC |
| author_facet | Miroslav IMBRISEVIC |
| contents | The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection Miroslav IMBRISEVIC Filosofía Nino Carlos S tacit consent irrevocability explicit denial objection Recently, David Boonin has put forward several objections to Carlos S. Nino's 'Consensual Theory of Punishment'. In this paper I will defend Nino against the 'explicit denial objection'. I will discuss whether Boonin's interpretation of Nino as a tacit consent theorist is right. I will argue that the offender's consent is neither tacit nor express, but a special category of implicit consent. Further, for Nino the legal-normative consequences of an act (of crime) are 'irrevocable', i.e. one cannot (expressly and successfully) deny liability to them. I will suggest an explanation for Nino's irrevocability claim. 2010 artículo científico 0495-4548 https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=339730812008 en http://www.redalyc.org/revista.oa?id=3397 THEORIA. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia application/pdf Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea THEORIA. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia (España) Num.2 Vol.25 |
| format | Artículo científico |
| id | redalyc_339730812008 |
| institution | Redalyc |
| language | en |
| publishDate | 2010 |
| publisher | Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea |
| spellingShingle | The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection Miroslav IMBRISEVIC Filosofía Nino Carlos S tacit consent irrevocability explicit denial objection The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection Miroslav IMBRISEVIC Filosofía Nino Carlos S tacit consent irrevocability explicit denial objection Recently, David Boonin has put forward several objections to Carlos S. Nino's 'Consensual Theory of Punishment'. In this paper I will defend Nino against the 'explicit denial objection'. I will discuss whether Boonin's interpretation of Nino as a tacit consent theorist is right. I will argue that the offender's consent is neither tacit nor express, but a special category of implicit consent. Further, for Nino the legal-normative consequences of an act (of crime) are 'irrevocable', i.e. one cannot (expressly and successfully) deny liability to them. I will suggest an explanation for Nino's irrevocability claim. 2010 artículo científico 0495-4548 https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=339730812008 en http://www.redalyc.org/revista.oa?id=3397 THEORIA. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia application/pdf Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea THEORIA. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia (España) Num.2 Vol.25 |
| title | The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection |
| topic | Filosofía Nino Carlos S tacit consent irrevocability explicit denial objection |
| url | https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=339730812008 |