寻求一个智力拼图的真相――康德报应主义新解

该怎样去解读康德关于惩罚的理论，是法哲学家们饶有兴味的难题。传统的报应主义解读模式在上世纪末和本世纪初受到了冲击，从而也引发了一系列混合论解读模式，包含“角色分离”和“一机两翼”两种模式。这些重构，实际上是功利主义理论旨趣下的产物，它们借用了康德看似碎片化和凌乱的论述，进行了一种精致但必然是误解的智力拼图。“双重身份”模式区分了惩罚的“本体”和惩罚的“现象”，前者遵循内在应得命题，后者则因情况而异，但仍然以绝对命令为首要根据。这一模式是纯粹报应主义的，但又不同于传统的报应论，它将有助于解释现有文本中诸多的对立和矛盾，因此更接近康德自己的观点。
Legal philosophers have been full of interest in how to interpret Kant？？s theory of punishment. The traditional theory of retribution was impacted at the end of last century and at the beginning of this century, thus this led to a series of mixed interpretations with models of “Role Separation” and “One Machine,Two Wings”. These reconstructions, which utilized Kant？？s seemingly fragmented and messy discourse for an elaborate but necessarily misunderstanding intellectual puzzle, are actually the product of the utilitarianism theory.This article advocates “dual identity” model, which distinguishes the “noumenon” and “phenomenon” of the punishment.The former follows the intrinsic desert proposition, while the latter varies contingently, but accords with imperative category as the primary basis. Such model, though different from traditional retribution theory, would be pure retribution. Much more closer to Kant？？s own point of view, it would help to explain many oppositions and contradictions in the Kant？？s existing texts.