Table of Contents

Introduction
Chapter One: Death and Retribution
Chapter Two: The Necessity of Execution
Chapter Three: The Irrevocability of Execution
Chapter Four: The Argument for Abolition
Chapter Five: The Prospects of the New Proceduralism
References

About the Author

Benjamin S. Yost is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Providence College and has previously taught at Harvard University and Cornell University. His specializations include the philosophy of punishment and Kant's practical philosophy, with his published work appearing in journals such as Utilitas, Journal of the American Philosophical Association, Kantian Review, and Continental Philosophy Review. He is currently
co-editing a volume entitled Philosophers on the Movement for Black Lives.

Reviews

"Yost...has written a brilliant analysis of philosophical arguments for and against the death penalty. Surveying hundreds of scholarly articles and works about capital punishment, the author carefully documents the inadequacies of pro-death penalty reasoning used by philosophers from Immanuel Kant to the present. Yost covers political theories, philosophical arguments, and legal justifications, surveying issues such as deterrence, irrevocability, cost/benefit
balance, inadequacy of attorneys, and the inherent fallibility of the American criminal justice system. Most important, he identifies a serious paradigm shift toward abolition of the death
penalty...This is a seminal, comprehensive treatment of the capital punishment...Essential." -- CHOICE
"This book is a gem, and it's worth thinking through Yost's arguments even if one ends up not entirely persuaded. Yost's first chapter is a model of what every introduction to a philosophy book should look like: he motivates his position, lays out his argument, and anticipates objections...Yost develops the irrevocability argument against the death penalty with more care and sophistication than anyone else in the literature that I'm aware of. In light of how
long and storied philosophical debates over the death penalty are, this is no small feat. Yost leaves those who advocate for the death penalty with much less ground to stand on." -- Criminal Justice
Ethics
"Benjamin S. Yost has written a meticulously researched and tightly argued treatment of the morality of execution...Yost's book is the most powerful treatment of the procedural argument against execution in the scholarly literature. Its intricate arguments richly repay close study. In light of the injustice of capital punishment, we can only hope that Yost's arguments will serve as potent intellectual ammunition for the righteous citizens fighting tirelessly
for abolition. I recommend the book wholeheartedly." -- Notre Dame Philosphical Reviews
"Philosophically, this book is to date the most sophisticated presentation of the proceduralist case for abolishing capital punishment. Opponents of the death penalty will be able to draw with profit upon Benjamin Yost's nuanced arguments, and supporters of the death penalty will need to come to grips with those arguments in order to counter them." --Matthew H. Kramer, Professor of Legal and Political Philosophy, Cambridge University
"The death penalty is the most severe punishment available for those countries that still retain it. Debates about whether it can be justified have run for as long as there has been capital punishment in any society--where each side largely digs in against the other. Benjamin Yost's defence of procedural abolitionism opens a new, convincing front as to why all of us, including retributivists, should not support death as a punishment." --Thom Brooks, Dean
& Professor of Law and Government, Durham University
"Appealing to the inherent human fallibility in the administration of the death penalty, Yost's Against Capital Punishment is a careful (and novel) attempt to show that capital punishment should be abolished. Legitimate legal systems correct and remedy their errors, but this commitment, Yost argues, is incompatible with punishing even the worst criminals with death. By shifting debates about capital punishment away from familiar disputes about desert
and deterrence toward neglected questions about its place in fair legal practices, Yost succeeds in altering the parameters of scholarly discussions surrounding capital punishment's defensibility." --Michael
Cholbi, Department of Philosophy, Cal Poly Pomona