Journal article icon

Journal article

Justification and motivation

Abstract:
According to the motivational thesis (MT), we are justified in performing an action if and only if we perform that action for the right reason(s). Proponents of MT disagree about how it is best interpreted—about what count as reasons of the right kind. In Fundamentals of Criminal Law, Andrew Simester criticises an interpretation offered by John Gardner. Here, I explore some of Simester's reasons for objecting to that interpretation, and I argue—partly on the basis of those same reasons—that Simester's own interpretation of MT should be revised. I conclude with a preliminary defence of an alternative interpretation, which I call the tripartite view of justification.
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions

Access Document

Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1007/s11572-023-09691-7

Authors

More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
SSD
Department:
Law
Sub department:
Law Faculty
Oxford college:
Worcester College
Role:
Author


Publisher:
Springer
Journal:
Criminal Law and Philosophy More from this journal
Publication date:
2023-09-08
Acceptance date:
2023-06-23
DOI:
EISSN:
1871-9805
ISSN:
1871-9791


Language:
English
Keywords:
Pubs id:
1539563
Local pid:
pubs:1539563
Deposit date:
2024-02-07
ARK identifier:

Terms of use


Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP