Moral Disquiet and the Punishment of Children
Dr Ruth Cigman (UCL)

14:00-15:30 (GMT) 
 
The best-known expression of moral disquiet about punishment comes from Jeremy Bentham, who believed that its ‘mischief’ is justified only by the avoidance of ‘greater mischief’. Many teachers and parents go further, suggesting that the punishment of children is always wrong. This has an ideological resonance that is rejected in favour of the view that of course punishment has a place in schools and homes. But what place? How is punishment justified in a general way? How can punishment practices go wrong? Why is the punishment of children often experienced as disquieting? How, if at all, can disquiet be quelled? The paper explores such questions. The standard philosophical characterisation of punishment as the authorised imposition of hardship or disadvantage in response to rule- breaches is presented as inadequate for education. Instead, punishment is characterised as a moral response, formal or informal, to perceived wrongdoing. Nuances of wrongdoing are explored by distinguishing justifiability, excusability, forgivability and understandability. This does mean embracing a culture of victimhood; rather, it paves the way for an ethical conception of punishment in education that can hopefully be practiced without disquiet.
 
Dr Ruth Cigman is Honorary Senior Research Associate in Philosophy of Education at the UCL Institute of Education. She is the author of Cherishing and the Good Life of Learning: Ethics, Education, Upbringing (Bloomsbury 2020).

For further inquiries tillsoj@hope.ac.uk