Can Retributivism and Risk Assessment Be Reconciled?

Bibliography

• Andrews, D., J. Bonta, and J. Wormith. “The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need Assessment.” Crime & Delinquency 52, no. 19 (2006): 7–27.
   Google Scholar
• Angwin, J., and J. Larson. “Machine Bias.” ProPublica, 2016. Accessed April 3, 2021. https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing
   Google Scholar
• Baier, A. C. “Cartesian Persons.” Philosophia 10 (1981): 169–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berman, M. N. “Punishment and Justification.” Ethics 118, no. 2 (2008): 258–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, T., W. Dieterich, and B. Ehret. “Evaluating the Predictive Validity of the COMPAS Risk and Needs Assessment System.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 36, no. 1 (2008): 21–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Code, L. “Second Persons.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary 17 (1987): 357–382.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, E. “Punishing Risk.” Georgetown Law Journal 107 (2018): 57–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dagan, N., and J. V. Roberts. “Retributivism, Penal Censure, and Life Imprisonment Without Parole.” Criminal Justice Ethics 38, no. 1 (2019): 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Duff, A. “Dangerousness and Citizenship: Essays in Honour of Andrew von Hirsch.” In Fundamentals of Sentencing Theory, edited by A. Ashworth and M. Wasik, 141–163. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Duff, A. “The Intrusion of Mercy.” Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 4 (2007): 361–387.
   Google Scholar
• Duff, A. “Penal Communications: Recent Work in the Philosophy of Punishment.” Crime and Justice 20 (1996): 1–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eubanks, V. Automating Inequality. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Feinberg, J. “Equal Punishment for Failed Attempts: Some Bad but Instructive Arguments Against It.” Arizona Law Review 37 (1995): 117–135.
   Google Scholar
• Feinberg, J. “Justice and Personal Desert.” In Doing and Deserving: Essays in the Theory of Responsibility, 55–87. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, F. “Desert: Reconsideration of Some Received Wisdom.” Mind 104, no. 413 (1995): 63–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frankfurt, H. “Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person.” Journal of Philosophy 68, no. 1 (1971): 5–20.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, C., and H. Nissenbaum. “Bias in Computing Systems.” ACM Transactions on Information Systems 14, no. 3 (1996): 330–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. G. “Do Engineers Have Social Responsibilities?” Journal of Applied Philosophy 9, no. 1 (1992): 21–34.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. “Rethinking the Social Responsibilities of Engineers as a Form of Accountability.” In Philosophy and Engineering: Exploring Boundaries, Expanding Connections, edited by D. Michelfelder, B. Newberry, and Q. Zhu, 85–98. Cham: Springer, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Kershnar, S. “A Defense of Retributivism.” International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14, no. 1 (2000): 97–117.
   Google Scholar
• Mabbott, J. D. “Punishment.” Mind 48, no. 190 (1939): 152–167.
   Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, C., and N. Stoljar. Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Mackie, J. L. “Morality and the Retributive Emotions.” Criminal Justice Ethics 1, no. 1 (1982): 3–10.
   Google Scholar
• Mulligan, T. Justice and the Meritocratic State. New York: Routledge, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, J. G. “Last Words on Retribution.” In The Routledge Handbook of Criminal Justice Ethics, 1st ed., edited by J. Jacobs, and J. Jackson, 28–41. New York: Routledge, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, J. G. “Legal Moralism and Liberalism.” Arizona Law Review 37 (1995): 73–93.
   Google Scholar
• Nissenbaum, H. “Accountability in a Computerized Society.” Science and Engineering Ethics 2, no. 1 (1996): 25–42.
   Google Scholar
• Northcott, R. “Big Data and Prediction: Four Case Studies.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 81 (2020): 96–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsaretti, S. Liberty, Desert and the Market: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Petersen, T. S. “Predictions, Dangerousness, and Retributivism.” The Journal of Ethics 18, no. 2 (2014): 137–151.
   Google Scholar
• Pojman, L. “Merit: Why do We Value it?” Journal of Social Philosophy 30, no. 1 (1999): 83–102.
   Google Scholar
• Rawls, J. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, D. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1930.
   Google Scholar
• Shafer-Landau, R. “Retributivism and Desert.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 81, no. 2 (2000): 189–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelby, T. “Justice, Deviance, and the Dark Ghetto.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 35, no. 2 (2007): 126–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, Gary. “Free Agency.” The Journal of Philosophy 72, no. 8 (1975): 205–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf, S. “Sanity and the Metaphysics of Responsibility.” In Responsibility, Character, and the Emotions: New Essays in Moral Psychology, edited by F. D. Schoeman, 46–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
   Google Scholar