Peculiarly Criminal: Resolving the prudential deterrence problem
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36399/GroundingsUG.16.433Keywords:
Law, Philosophy of LawAbstract
This article contributes to the debate in the philosophy of law over the justification of punishment. It focusses on the ‘communicative’ theory of punishment as articulated by Antony Duff in his chapter of the recently published Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Punishment (2024). In the chapter Duff elaborates his theory and proposes that the ‘prudential deterrence’ problem is the most serious objection to it. In this article I propose a novel solution to the problem. I argue that the problem arises from Duff’s failure to properly outline the role of his theory in relation to the different kinds of law (principally criminal and non-criminal). Accordingly, I clarify this relation by suggesting that the communicative theory ought to be designated as what justifies the criminal law in particular, while the considerations raised by the prudential deterrence problem are what defines the law apart from particular criminal or non-criminal considerations.
References
Duff, Antony, ‘Communicative Theory’ in The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Punishment, ed. J. Ryberg (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024). pp.90-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197750506.013.6
Feinberg, Joel, ‘The Expressive Function of Punishment’ in The Monist, 49, 3 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965). pp.397-423. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist196549326
Garder, John, From Personal Life to Private Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018). https://global.oup.com/academic/product/from-personal-life-to-private-law-9780198818755?cc=gb&lang=en&
Singer, Richard G., ‘The Resurgence of Mens Rea: The Rise and Fall of Strict Criminal Liability’ in Boston College Law Review, 30 (2,2) (Newton: Boston College Law School, 1989). pp.337-408. https://bclawreview.bc.edu/articles/1476
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 James Farrow
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The CC BY 4.0 license is a Creative Commons license. This is a non-copyleft free license that is good for art and entertainment works, and educational works. It is compatible with all versions of the GNU GPL; however, like all CC licenses, it should not be used on software. People are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format; Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. But they must conform to the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Please check individual article PDF copies to see if any additional restrictions apply.
