Punishment

From New World Encyclopedia


Punishment is the practice of imposing something unpleasant on a subject as a response to some unwanted or immoral behavior or disobedience that the subject has displayed.

History

The word "punishment" is the abstract substantivation of the verb to punish, which is recorded in English since 1340, deriving from Old French puniss-, an extended form of the stem of punir "to punish," from Latin punire "inflict a penalty on, cause pain for some offense," earlier poenire, from poena "penalty, punishment." Colloquial use of to punish for "to inflict heavy damage or loss" is first recorded in 1801, originally in boxing; for punishing as "hard-hitting" is from 1811. [1]

The progress of civilization has resulted in a vast change alike in the theory and in the method of punishment. In primitive society punishment was left to the individuals wronged or their families, and was vindictive or retributive: in quantity and quality it would bear no special relation to the character or gravity of the offence.

Gradually there would arise the idea of proportionate punishment, of which the characteristic type is an eye for an eye. The second stage was punishment by individuals under the control of the state, or community; in the third stage, with the growth of law, the state took over the primitive function and provided itself with the machinery of justice for the maintenance of public order. [2] Henceforward crimes are against the state, and the exaction of punishment by the wronged individual is illegal (compare Lynch Law). Even at this stage the vindictive or retributive character of punishment remains, but gradually, and specially after the humanist movement under thinkers like Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, new theories begin to emerge. Two chief trains of thought have combined in the condemnation of primitive theory and practice. On the one hand the retributive principle itself has been very largely superseded by the protective and the reformative; on the other punishments involving bodily pain have become objectionable to the general sense of society. Consequently corporal and even capital punishment occupy a far less prominent position, and tend everywhere to disappear. It began to be recognized also that stereotyped punishments, such as ones that belong to penal codes, fail to take due account of the particular condition of an offence and the character and circumstances of the offender. A fixed fine, for example, operates very unequally on rich and poor.

Modern theories date from the 18th century, when the humanitarian movement began to teach the dignity of the individual and to emphasize rationality and responsibility. The result was the reduction of punishment both in quantity and in severity, the improvement of the prison system, and the first attempts to study the psychology of crime and to distinguish between classes of criminals with a view to their improvement (see criminology, crime, juvenile delinquency).

These latter problems are the province of criminal anthropology and criminal sociology, sciences so called because they view crime as the outcome of anthropological viz. social conditions. The law breaker is himself a product of social evolution and cannot be regarded as solely responsible for his disposition to transgress. Habitual crime is thus to be treated as a disease. Punishment can, therefore, be justified only in so far as it either protects society by removing temporarily or permanently one who has injured it, or acting as a deterrent, or aims at the moral regeneration of the criminal. Thus the retributive theory of punishment with its criterion of justice as an end in itself gives place to a theory which regards punishment solely as a means to an end, utilitarian or moral, according as the common advantage or the good of the criminal is sought. [3]

Michel Foucault describes in detail the evolution of punishment from hanging, drawing and quartering of medieval times to the modern systems of fines and prisons. He sees a trend in criminal punishment from vengeance by the King to a more practical, utilitarian concern for deterrence and rehabilitation.

In operant conditioning, punishment is the presentation of a stimulus contingent on a response which results in a decrease in response strength (as evidenced by a decrease in the frequency of response). The effectiveness of punishment in suppressing the response depends on many factors, including the intensity of the stimulus and the consistency with which the stimulus is presented when the response occurs. In parenting, additional factors that increase the effectiveness of punishment include a verbal explanation of the reason for the punishment and a good relationship between the parent and the child. [4]

Definitions

In common usage, the word "punishment" might be described as "an authorized imposition of deprivations — of freedom or privacy or other goods to which the person otherwise has a right, or the imposition of special burdens — because the person has been found guilty of some criminal violation, typically (though not invariably) involving harm to the innocent." [5]

The most common applications are in legal and similarly 'regulated' contexts, being the infliction of some kind of pain or loss upon a person for a misdeed, i.e. for transgressing a law or command (including prohibitions) given by some authority (such as an educator, employer or supervisor, public or private official).

In the field of psychology punishment has a more restrictive and technical definition. Punishment is the reduction of a behavior via a stimulus which is applied ("positive punishment") or removed ("negative punishment"). Making an offending student lose recess or play privileges are examples of negative punishment, while chores or spanking are examples of positive punishment. The definition requires that punishment is only determined after the fact by the reduction in behavior; if the offending behavior of the subject does not decrease then it is not considered punishment. There is some conflation of punishment and aversives, though an aversive that does not decrease behavior is not considered punishment. In operant conditioning, punishment is the presentation of a stimulus contingent on a response which results in a decrease in response strength (as evidenced by a decrease in the frequency of response). The effectiveness of punishment in suppressing the response depends on many factors, including the intensity of the stimulus and the consistency with which the stimulus is presented when the response occurs. In parenting, additional factors that increase the effectiveness of punishment include a verbal explanation of the reason for the punishment and a good relationship between the parent and the child. [6]

In terms of socialization, punishment is seen as the result of broken laws and taboos. Punishment sets the bar for what is and is not acceptable in society. Punishment reinforces the progression of society and gives judicial backing to the established laws. Durkheim suggests that without punishment, society would devolve into a state of lawlessness, anomie. The very function of the penal system is to inspire law abiding citizens, not lawlessness. In this way, punishment establishes acceptable behavior for socialized people. [7]

Scope of application

The person who undergoes punishment may, depending on the context, be called punishee, client (as in psychology), or, more from the viewpoint of the discipliner; offender, culprit, bottom in BDSM etc.

  • Most often, criminals are punished judicially, by fines, corporal punishment or custodial sentences such as prison; detainees risk further punishments for breaches of internal rules.
  • Children, pupils and other trainees are also punished by their educators or instructors (mainly parents, guardians, or teachers, tutors and coaches). The same used to apply to wives and unmarried daughters as they were not legally emancipated from 'paternal' (or succeeding marital) discipline.
  • Slaves, domestic and other servants used to be punishable by their masters; in fact, even modern employees can still be subject to a contractual form of fine or demotion.
  • Most hierarchical organizations, such as military and police forces, or even churches, still apply quite rigid internal discipline, even with a judicial system of their own (court martial, canonical courts).
  • Punishment may also be applied on moral, especially religious, grounds, as in penance (which is voluntary) or imposed in a theocracy with a religious police (as in a strict Islamic state like Iran or under the Taliban) or (though not a true theocracy) by Inquisition.
  • In a wider sense, often termed penalty, punishments can be incurred for infringing the rules of a game, as in sports, hazing (e.g., in paddle games) etcetera. These include:
    • Being sent off or sent to the bench ("sin bin"—time in sin-bin varies from game to game: 45 seconds in water polo, 2–10 minutes in ice hockey, 10 minutes in rugby, etc.), or even barred from playing for the whole match or even longer (as with red cards in soccer)
    • Collective punishments, which don't only effect the offender but the whole team, such as penalty points, a shot at the goal for the opponent side, not being allowed to replace a player send to the bench.

Anatomical target

A crucial, inevitable choice is which part of the body is to suffer the painful treatment; sometimes a combination of several targets is chosen, so as to maximize the longer-lasting discomfort.

Several considerations can be taken into account, mainly :

  • how painful is it
  • how humiliating (especially if bared)
  • how safe (except for deliberate mutilation -such as amputation and branding- or execution, grave permanent damage must be avoided) if badly hit and, even in more moderate cases, how incapacitating (unless the punishee is already under custodial sentence other than hard labor, physically disabling the victim to work is rather contraproductive instead of coercing better -obedient, productive- conduct).
  • In addition, for instant discipline on the spot the preference tends to go to what can be hit immediately, especially if already bare (possibly so ordered or arranged) or scarcely protected by clothing, so often head and hands, or bare torso; secondly what can be bared with a simple gesture (lifting a dress or pulling down (under)garments, before proceeding with a spanking, paddling, etc.

Other parameters of severity

  • Firstly there is the dosing: how many strokes? This is of course easy to prescribe, so the choice is clearly attributed.
  • An objective flaw in the system is that only mechanical administration (not practiced for beatings, as opposed to say the guillotine in capital punishment) would make the dosage an objective measure of the force applied, allowing a realistic estimation of the corporal damage it inflicts; even then, the actual level of induced pain can only be guessed as it depends on the individually varied threshold of sensitivity, even if allowances are made for such factors as age/size, but a discipliner who repeatedly punishes the same person(s) (such as an educator) may get a reasonable feel for it, raising the dilemma if justice is best served by equal punishment for equal crimes or by equal suffering
  • Various subtle modes of application also influence the efficiency of a stroke, e.g. British policemen wielding the birch learned it hurts even more if a move of the hand makes it slide along (like a claw) just when it reaches the bare skin
File:Gilecory.jpg
Giles Cory was pressed to death during the Salem Witch Trials in the 1690s as he didn't plead
  • Some punishments have an in-built vagueness of severity, even an interative character, e.g. crushing as coercitive torture to force an accused to enter a plea would become an execution by his/her 'obstinacy' till asphixiation occurs.

Dramatis personae

While a punishment can routinely be performed with only two participants, e.g. an educator putting a naughty child over his lap and spanking its bottom while scolding its misdeeds, there is often, especially with a more severe punishment as well as in an institutional context, a more elaborate and formalistic procedure which can involve a small host of cast members.

On the punishing side

It all starts with the authority to punish: for judicial punishment, this is normally the legislator, who defines the rules, at least in principle, as to which inacceptable actions are to be met with painful punishment, and who can apply them. Next there is the role of the judge, who determines for each punishable deed whether the conditions for application are met and fixes the fitting punishment. Finally there is the actual punishment officer(s) charged with the physical execution. While in private spheres this is often the same as the 'judge', judicial sentences are generally ordered to be carried out by a third party specified by the law or in the judgment.

The victim of the punishment

The punished party is often described by terms referring to his legal or other punishable status, e.g. convict, prisoner, culprit, miscreant, offender. While he is the center of attention, as a rule little or no choice is given to him. In some cases punishees are even forced to some cooperation, such as sailors having to prepare a cat o' nine tails for use on their own back and children sent to cut a switch or rod for use on their own bottoms.

Medical officer(s)

Often it is prescribed by law, sentence or custom that a medically qualified person must examine the condemned (in the judicial sphere) to estimate whether the offender's health requires the beating to be postponed, mitigated or even abandoned. Usually the doctor stays to observe the execution of the sentence, in principle to intervene if the victim is in excessive (especially mortal) danger. After the wounds have been inflicted, the medical examiner examines the wounds, which may urgently require medical care such as disinfecting and dressing.

Passive witnesses

Especially if a precise punishment is imposed by regulations or specified in a formal sentence, often one or more official witnesses are prescribed, or somehow specified (e.g. from the faculty in a school, court -, police - or military officers) to see to the correct execution. A party grieved by the punishee may be allowed the satisfaction of witnessing the humbled state of exposure and agony. The presence of peers, such as class mates, or an even more public venue such as a pillory on a square, in modern times even press presence, may serve two purposes: increasing the humilitation of the punishee and serving as an example to the audience.

Types of punishments

Punishment can be divided into Positive punishment (the application of an aversive stimulus, such as pain) and Negative punishment (the removal or denial of a desired object, condition, or aversive stimulus).

Criminal punishment

Defector from the Viet Cong who was sent to a prison camp and deliberately starved.
  • Socio-economical punishments:
  • fines or loss of income
  • confiscation
  • demotion, suspension or expulsion (especially in a strict hierarchy, such as military or clergy)
  • restriction or loss of civic and other rights
  • community service
  • Corporal punishment. Legality of these types of punishment varies from country to country. However it can be defined more widely:
  • Whipping or caning with various implements and on various body parts
  • Marking via branding or mutilations such as amputation.
  • Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, the most extreme form of punishment, sometimes used in countries where beating is seen as inhumane. See use of death penalty worldwide. Methods of capital punishment include crucifixion, hanging, the firing squad, burning at the stake, lethal injection, gas chambers, and starvation, among others.
  • Uncomfortable positions, such as in too confined spaces or being tied down long in an unnatural position that puts muscles under increasingly painful stress
  • Custodial sentences include imprisonment and other forms of forced detention (e.g., involuntary institutional psychiatry) and hard labor are in fact also physical punishments, even if no actual beatings are in force internally; note that behavioral psychologists do not consider prison a sound punishment because most criminals are repeat offenders, thus, their behavior has not changed. If the behavior does not change then any stimulus that was presented is not punishment just aversive.
  • Forms of deprivation of sleep, food etcetera, though these are often unofficial or accessory
  • Excessive physical efforts such as prolonged calisthenics
  • Banishment or restraining order
  • clinical castration for sexual assault is being tried in a few countries but may lead to charges of eugenics, since the individual is rendered infertile as a result
  • Public humiliation often combines social elements with corporal punishment, and indeed often punishments from two or more categories are combined (especially when these are meant reinforce each-other's effect) as in the logic of penal harm.
  • In the past, people in some parts of the Western world were punished by being put in the stocks, or by being ducked in water.

For children

Examples of punishments imposed by educators (parents, guardians or teachers etc.; traditions differ greatly in time, place and cultural sphere; some are considered illegal abuse in certain countries) include:

  • Corporal punishment as above:
    • Mainly spanking in various modes (banned in some countries, in others even prescribed by law);
    • Uncomfortable and/or humiliating positions
  • Mild forms of custodial sentences
    • Time-outs such as corner-time or even locking up in a dark place
    • detention, often combined with tasks like studying, extra homework etc.
    • grounding in general or specific refusal of permission to participate in some fun activity or to see a friend (usually seen as a bad influence)
  • Temporary (or permanent) removal of privileges, rights, or choices, such as lack of desserts or toys
  • Compulsory activity such as extra chores

Even the above have come under criticism in recent times. Arguments against non-violent modification of behavior include the issue of ethics, and whether one's will should be forced on children. Positive parenting and Taking Children Seriously are non-punitive alternatives to modifying behavior.


While it is possible to classify corporal punishments by the categories of its scope of application (e.g. educational including parental and school discipline, other domestic, judicial etc.), i.e. by who can punish who and why, see above- this section elaborates the various ways to perform the physical torment.


Other

  • penance
  • psychological punishments
  • reinforcement

Possible reasons for punishment

There are many possible reasons that might be given to justify or explain why someone ought to be punished; here follows a broad outline of typical, possibly contradictory justifications.

Deterrence

Deterrence means dissuading someone from future wrongdoing, by making the punishment severe enough that the benefit gained from the offense is outweighed by the cost (and probability) of the punishment.

Deterrence is a very common reason given for why someone should be punished. It is often believed that punishment, especially if made known to or even witnessed be the punishee's peers, can also deter them from committing similarly punishable offences, and thus serves a greater good preventively.

However, it is sometimes claimed that using punishment as a deterrent has the fundamental flaw that human nature tends to ignore the possibility of punishment until they are caught, and actually can be attracted even more to the 'forbidden fruit', or even for various reasons glorify the punishee, e.g. admiring a fellow for 'taking it like a man'. Furthermore, especially with children and depending on the issue, feelings of bitterness and resentment can arouse towards the punisher (parent) who threaten a child with punishment as it doesn't feel respected.

Punishment is also used occasionally within the treatment for individuals with certain mental or developmental disorders, such as autism, to deter or at least reduce the occurrence of behavior which can be injurious (such as head banging or self-mutilation), dangerous (such as biting others) or socially stigmatizing (such as stereotypical repetition of phrases or noises). In this case, each time the undesired behavior occurs, punishment is applied to reduce future instances. Generally the use of punishment in these situations is considered ethically acceptable if the corrected behavior is a significant threat to the individual and/or to others.

Arguably deterrence, regardles of effectiveness and justification, does not qualify as punishment when the punishee (child, animal or mental patient) was not sufficiently aware that its act would be considered punishable misbehavior and hence did not make a 'guilty' choice.

Rehabilitation

Some punishment includes work to reform and rehabilitate the wrongdoer so that they will not commit the offense again. This is distinghuised from deterrence, in that the goal here is to change the offender's attitude to what they have done, and make them come to accept that their behaviour was wrong.

Incapacitation

In the prison system, imprisonment has the effect of confining prisoners, physically preventing them from committing crimes against those outside, i.e. protecting the community. The most dangerous criminals may be sentenced to life imprisonment, or even to irreparable alternatives — the death penalty, or castration of sexual offenders — for this reason of the common good.

Restoration

For minor offences, punishment may take the form of the offender "righting the wrong"; for example, a vandal might be made to clean up the mess he has made. In more serious cases, punishment in the form of fines and compensation payments may also be considered a sort of "restoration." Some libertarians argue that full restoration or restitution on an individualistic basis is all that is ever just, and that this is compatible with both retributivism and a utilitarian degree of deterrence.[1]

Revenge, Retributive justice, or Retribution

Retribution is the practice of "getting even" with a wrongdoer — the suffering of the wrongdoer is seen as good in itself, even if it has no other benefits. One reason for societies to include this judicial element is to diminish the perceived need for street justice, blood revenge and vigilantism. However, some argue that this is a "zero sum game," that such acts of street justice and blood revenge are not removed from society, but responsibility for carrying them out is merely transferred to the state.

Retribution sets an important standard on punishment — the transgressor must get what he deserves, but no more. Therefore, a thief put to death is not retribution; a murderer put to death is. Adam Smith, who is credited as the father of Capitalism, wrote extensively about punishment. In his view, an important reason for punishment is not only deterrence, but also satisfying the resentment of the victim. Moreover, in the case of the death penalty, the retribution goes to the dead victim, not his family. (So, to extend Smith's views, a murderer can be spared the death penalty only by the victim's express wish, made when he was alive.) One great difficulty of this approach is that of judging exactly what it is that the transgressor "deserves." For instance, it may be retribution to put a thief to death if he steals a family's only means of livelihood; conversely, mitigating circumstances may lead to the conclusion that the execution of a murderer is not retribution.

A specific way to elaborate this concept in the very punishment is the mirror punishment (the more literal applications of "an eye for an eye"), a penal form of 'poetic justice' which reflects the nature or means of the crime in the means of (mainly corporal) punishment.

Honoring Values

Punishment can be seen to honor the values codified in law. In this view, the value of human life is seen to be honored by the punishment of a murderer. Proponents of capital punishment have been known to base their position on this concept. Victor Balest takes this even farther as he maintains that it is immoral of a society not to apply such retributive justice in a case where the guilt of the criminal has been proven beyond doubt and where all legal appeals have been legitimized and exhausted. Retributive justice is, in his view, a moral mandate that societies must guarantee and act upon. He contends that if wrongdoing goes unpunished, individual citizens will become demoralized and this ultimately undermines the moral fabric of the society. Not to punish wrongdoing is unfair, and it has recently been shown in clinical studies of primates that fairness and lack of fairness is inherently understood and acted upon.

There are some commentators such as Chuck Colson who accept this view as valid but believe that the fallibility of human justice systems should preclude using it as a justification.

Education

From German Criminal Law, Punishment can be explained by positive prevention theory to use criminal justice system to teach people what are the social norms for what is correct and acts as a reinforcement. It teaches people to obey the law and eliminates the free-rider principle of people not obeying the law getting away with it.

Notes

  1. Online Etymology Dictionary
  2. Kircheimer, Otto. Rusche, George. 2003. Punishment and Social Structure. Transaction Publishers. Retrieved May 2007.
  3. Garland, David. 1993. Punishment and Modern Society. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved May 2007.
  4. Huitt, W. Hummel, J. 1997. An Introduction to Operant (Instrumental) Conditioning. Valdosta State University Press. Retrieved May 2007.
  5. Bedau, Adam. 2005. "Punishment" Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved May 2007.
  6. Huitt, W. Hummel, J. 1997. An Introduction to Operant (Instrumental) Conditioning. Valdosta State University Press. Retrieved May 2007.
  7. Durkheim, Emile. 1895. On the Normality of Crime. Retrieved May 2007


Sources and References


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.