University of Isfahan Metaphysics 2476-3276 17 39 2025 03 21 The Ethics of Punitivism from the Perspective of Shatibi's Maghasid al-Sharia and Bentham's Utilitarianism The Ethics of Punitivism from the Perspective of Shatibi's Maghasid al-Sharia and Bentham's Utilitarianism 101 114 28771 10.22108/mph.2024.141106.1556 FA Saeed Karimi Department of Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of religions and Denominations, Qom, Iran Morteza Tabatabee Department of Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of religions and Denominations, Qom, Iran Journal Article 2024 04 24 Punishment, its justification, and the relationship between punishment and justice are important topics in moral philosophy and jurisprudence. In this article, first, the definition of retributivism and its purpose are stated, and then the theories of Shatibi and Jeremy Bentham regarding punishment are presented. After a comparative discussion, the objections against the utilitarian school regarding punishment are mentioned. In Bentham's utilitarianism, punishment itself causes suffering unless its benefit outweighs its harm. It is desirable to punish when it brings the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people, even if it causes injustice. Based on Shatabi's criminalism, the criminal must be punished. One of the most important reasons is the deterrence of punishment. If it does not cause deterrence in rare situations, he should still be punished; Because it may have ingredients that are hidden from us. Through Shatibi's retributive theory, which operates based on rules, objections are raised against Bentham's retributive theory, which proceeds based on utilitarianism, including the issue of justice being called into question in punishment. Additionally, three major differences between Shatibi's purposes of Sharia and Bentham's utilitarian retributivism are discussed, which in a way demonstrate the strength and superiority of the purposes of Sharia over utilitarianism. The first difference is the temporal criteria for benefit. The second difference is the confinement of pleasure to material pleasures in utilitarianism, while the purposes of Sharia consider both material and spiritual pleasures. The third difference is that in utilitarianism, the consideration of religion is subordinate to worldly matters, whereas in the purposes of Sharia, the consideration of religion takes precedence over worldly matters, such that religion is the basis and foundation for other benefits. Punishment, its justification, and the relationship between punishment and justice are important topics in moral philosophy and jurisprudence. In this article, first, the definition of retributivism and its purpose are stated, and then the theories of Shatibi and Jeremy Bentham regarding punishment are presented. After a comparative discussion, the objections against the utilitarian school regarding punishment are mentioned. In Bentham's utilitarianism, punishment itself causes suffering unless its benefit outweighs its harm. It is desirable to punish when it brings the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people, even if it causes injustice. Based on Shatabi's criminalism, the criminal must be punished. One of the most important reasons is the deterrence of punishment. If it does not cause deterrence in rare situations, he should still be punished; Because it may have ingredients that are hidden from us. Through Shatibi's retributive theory, which operates based on rules, objections are raised against Bentham's retributive theory, which proceeds based on utilitarianism, including the issue of justice being called into question in punishment. Additionally, three major differences between Shatibi's purposes of Sharia and Bentham's utilitarian retributivism are discussed, which in a way demonstrate the strength and superiority of the purposes of Sharia over utilitarianism. The first difference is the temporal criteria for benefit. The second difference is the confinement of pleasure to material pleasures in utilitarianism, while the purposes of Sharia consider both material and spiritual pleasures. The third difference is that in utilitarianism, the consideration of religion is subordinate to worldly matters, whereas in the purposes of Sharia, the consideration of religion takes precedence over worldly matters, such that religion is the basis and foundation for other benefits. https://mph.ui.ac.ir/article_28771_6cdf5702d0ea21d6b22bcf0720f0bfea.pdf