Justice, Crime, and Ethics (Braswell): Chapter 1

Justice: Contexts, Judgment, and Goals

Chapter 1 of JCE

CONTEXT

Three contexts of Justice

• Personal—a person’s set of beliefs and way of being in an environment.• Social—the environment in which a person exists, which includes other

persons.• Criminal Justice—the limits imposed on an environment and the

enforcement of those limits.

Three contexts of Justice

• Brian Glenney—White male, husband, father of four, Philosophy Professor, Artist, Writer, Churchy Christian, Vegetarian, Social Justice Beliefs

• Middle class New England America—College Town (Burlington), Driving Shopping, skateboarding, Biking, Painting,

• Vermont/US Law—Speed limit, no vandalism, no skateboarding, Cops are chill so far, low crime rate, feel safe and secure

Three contexts of Justice • __________(name)______________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(beliefs/way)

• ________(place)_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(space/activities)

•________(law)______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(limits/coercion/feel)

Three contexts of Justice: Intersections

A truer picture of the contexts of criminal justice would show intersecting personal/social/and criminal justice contexts.

Three contexts of Justice: Intersections

The authors suggest a metaphor of a calm water surface, with a single perturbation.

Three contexts of Justice: Intersections

A truer picture of the contexts of criminal justice in the world would be the surface of a pond in a hail storm.

Course detail of this class

JUDGEMENT

Reflective Judgment in Context

• Every self-reflective person judges themselves. (reflection)• Every social person judges others in

relation to the judgment of themselves. (meta-reflection)• Every coercive force judges citizenry in

relation to law, to others, and to themselves. (meta-reflective-reflection)

“The social context is not concerned merely with how we judge others as being good or evil but also how we judge ourselves in relationship to others. (5)

“I explore any new law…in terms of my personal beliefs…value system…how it will affect the social community. Is it just and fair to all parts and groups… (6)

Adam Smith on Reactive Judgment

• Smith argued that we experience instinctive feelings or sentiments in our first moral experiences.

• “To the man who first saw an inhuman murder, committed from avarice, envy, or unjust resentment…[h]is detestation of this crime, it is evident, would arise instantaneously and antecedent to his having formed to himself any such general rule…which he might afterwards form…upon the detestation which he felt necessarily arise in his own breast, at the thought of this, and every other particular action of the same kind. (TMS III.iv.8)

• The negative sentiments of the man viewing the murder are instinctive, while the moral rules that follow are based on inferences, like generalizations, from such experiences.

Adam Smith on Reflective Judgment

• Smith argued that we develop a kind of automatic reflection that involves putting ourselves in the offenders shoes and sympathizing with their state at the time of the crime. • “We either approve or disapprove of the conduct of another man according

as we feel that, when we bring his case home to ourselves, we either can or cannot entirely sympathize with the sentiments and motives which directed it (TMS III.i.2).”

Adam Smith on Reflective Judgment

• “We either approve or disapprove of the conduct of another man according as we feel that, when we bring his case home to ourselves, we either can or cannot entirely sympathize with the sentiments and motives which directed it (TMS III.i.2).”

Attribution: We instinctually attribute an emotional state as the cause of the observed activity of the person whose actions we are observing. Projection: We project ourselves into the environment of the person whose actions we are observing. Approximation: We feel the emotional experiences approximate to what we would feel in the projected environment.

Evaluation: We praise or blame the actions of the person we are observing according to a ratio of emotion, cause of emotion and warranted action were we in their situation.

Reactive => Reflective Judgment

• Ethics develops reflective judgment about oneself

• Social Ethics develops reflective judgment about others.

• Criminal Justice Ethics develops reflective judgment about law, coercion, and punishment.

GOALS

Goal: Reflective Judgment

Criminal Justice Ethics develops reflective judgment about law, coercion, and punishment.

Five Goals of Criminal Justice Ethics

1. “Awaken Sympathy!” Be aware and open to the ethical dimensions.2. “Question and Search!” Calibrate our judgment of the ethical

dimension with critical, self-reflective, and analytical thought and searching, insightful questions.

3. “Ally/Advocate/Activist Up!” Take personal responsibility for justice.4. “Coercion is Crucial!” How to get others to do things is the

fundamental basis of the Criminal Justice context.5. “Calibrate Wholesight!” Cultivate a wise judgment that can assess

the situation with mind and heart. Think about the long term problems you might create with short term solutions.

Wholesight?Cultivate a wise judgment that can assess any situation with mind and heart. Think about the long term problems you might create with short term solutions. Think about the past events that led to the situation.