Tuesday, October 02, 2012

Cohen on Criminals and Guilt

A clear distinction must be introduced between the judgment of the judge about the guilt according to the relevant paragraph of the law and the corresponding determination of facts, on the one hand, and the judgment about human guilt on the other hand. We are not to think, however, that the latter has been set aside; rather, through this distinction man's guilt will come to a more exact declaration. When he receives the declaration of guilt from the judge, the criminal himself has to take the guilt upon himself, and only the loss of the soundness of his mind can exempt him from it.

Hermann Cohen, Religion of Reason Out of the Sources of Judaism. Kaplan, tr. Scholars Press (Atlanta: 1995) p. 167. Emphasis in original.

1 comment:

  1. What a very deep logical information you have here. To identify someone if he is guilty or not is ideally confusing. A person can declare he's guilty even if he's not and can deny if he really is. 

    ReplyDelete

No anonymity (but consistent pseudonyms allowed). Abusive comments, especially directed toward other commenters, will be deleted; abusive commenters will be hunted down and shot. By posting a comment you agree to these terms and conditions.

Please understand that this weblog runs on a third-party comment system, not on Blogger's comment system. If you have come by way of a mobile device and can see this message, you may have landed on the Blogger comment page; your comments will only be shown on this page and not on the page most people will see, and it is much more likely that your comment will be missed (although I do occasionally check to make sure that no comments are being overlooked).