ABSTRACT
What are the foundations of Hart’s master idea, that is, the idea that the utilitarian justification of punishment is compatible with several principles of justice in the distribution of punishment? In this chapter, I argue that this idea (as well as Hart’s insistence on the complexity of punishment) rests on two things: an analytic method of distinguishing issues and a form of value pluralism very close to that of Isaiah Berlin. I then explain that Hart, in addition to being a value pluralist, also defends what I call “pluralism about forms of moral reason”. This variety of pluralism is very important for the question of justification of punishment. Since moral pluralists are often criticized for not telling us how to solve moral conflicts or combine values/forms of moral reason, I show that Hart put forward some modest but inspiring ideas on this difficult matter.
