One of the functions of philosophy is to combat ambiguity and muddle. Yet in discussions of the justification of punishment, philosophers persist in talking of 'retribution' and 'retributive theory' as if these labels stood for something relatively simple and straightforward. The fact is that the term 'retributive' as used in philosophy has become so imprecise and multivocal that it is doubtful whether it any longer serves a useful purpose.
(John Cottingham, "Varieties of Retribution," The Philosophical Quarterly 29 [July 1979]: 238-46, at 238)
Note from KBJ: I can't wait to acquire and read Dr Cottingham's latest book. As for the quotation, I'm inclined to say that the only function of philosophy is to combat ambiguity and muddle. Philosophers, as such, have neither evaluative nor factual expertise. Their expertise is conceptual.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 