is to defend the liberty of society as a whole against
individual transgressors. Employing punishment to
coerce confessions, intimidate opponents, and consoli-
date political power is illegitimate and unjust.
Second, Beccaria also adopted the principle, popu-
larized in UTILITARIANISM, that “the greatest happiness
of the greatest number” is the only criterion to be used
for evaluating laws and social policy. Beccaria’s com-
mitment to social reform motivated his critique of bar-
baric and inhumane punishment. Because the primary
purpose of punishment is to ensure the continued
existence of society, laws and punishments carried out
through the arbitrary use of power must be eliminated
because they threaten the happiness of individual
members of society. Consequently, Beccaria argued that
torture and capital punishment, especially when used
in response to minor offenses, undermine respect for
legitimate authority.
In addition, Beccaria held that deterrence rather
than retribution should be the aim of punishment.
Mere retribution is neither useful nor necessary for the
protection of society. The chief problem that Beccaria
identified in the administration of justice was the
inconsistency and inequality of sentencing, due prima-
rily to the extensive discretionary powers of judges.
Beccaria suggested that laws should clearly define
crimes and that judges should be restricted to deter-
mining only whether a person has or has not violated
the law. Once a person has been found guilty, Beccaria
believed that punishment should be applied quickly as
it is the swift certainty of its application that best
deters others. Finally, Beccaria argued that punishment
should be proportional to the gravity of the offense,
excluding such severe punishments as torture and cap-
ital punishment. Even the most serious of criminal
offenses, Beccaria insisted, ought to be punished by
long-term imprisonment rather than by death. Ulti-
mately, Beccaria’s goal of penal reform was an expres-
sion of his desire to protect “the rights of man.”
Further Reading
Maestro, M. Cesare Beccaria and the Origins of Penal Reform.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1973.
Becket, Sir Thomas (1118–1170) English chan-
cellor and archbishop of Canterbury
As an English churchman involved in politics, Becket
represents the check on royal power by the church. In
1163, King Henry II coerced English bishops to
approve laws that transferred power from ecclesiastical
to secular (royal) courts. Becket, as archbishop of Can-
terbury (the highest authority in the English church),
refused the king’s order. King Henry II convened a
council of his loyal barons and bishops to punish
Becket, forcing the archbishop to escape to France.
After extensive negotiations between the king, Becket,
and the pope, during which two bishops loyal to the
king were excommunicated and Henry II threatened to
expel from England all clergy associated with Becket, a
reconciliation was realized. Becket returned to England
triumphantly. His resistance to royal encroachment was
popularly seen as a valuable check on the government
and limitation on arbitrary royal power. When he
refused to absolve the excommunicated English bish-
ops unless they swore allegiance to the pope, the king
shouted words in a fit of rage, which four knights took
as orders to kill Becket. The archbishop was murdered
in the cathedral on December 29, 1170. The European
response to this assassination of a church leader by the
state was shock and horror. Pope Alexander III named
Becket a saint of the church on February 21, 1173, and
King Henry had to do public penance.
Becket’s resistance to the government and martyr-
dom stands as a historical example of opposing state
power by appealing to a law higher than worldly
power and forms a basis for CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE on
moral grounds.behaviorism/behaviorist
An approach to the study of individuals and society
that relies on data or information observed and meas-
ured by the senses of perception (sight, hearing, etc.).
MODERNsocial science relies heavily on behaviorism. It
is essentially the application of the scientific method of
EMPIRICALobservation to human psychology and soci-
ety. This involves looking at behavior, or human
actions, rather than motives, reason, or other aspects
of human life, claiming that this method of study
yields greater knowledge of human nature and society
than traditional philosophical rational or spiritual
approaches. Behaviorism claims only to “describe” the
facts, not to evaluate or to judge them. It claims to be
“value-free” science, as opposed to imposing some
interpretation or standard (from ethics, culture, reli-
gion) from outside the observed phenomenon. So, for
example, a behaviorist political scientist studies thebehaviorism/behaviorist 31