عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]چکیده [English]
Historical approach to the pattern of penal policy making reveals that purposes of punishment have been changed through the time in diverse major legal systems. There is a popular misconception which considers developments of purposes of punishment, including but not limited to retributivism, deterrence, rehabilitation, balance theory, distributive justice, moral education, incapacitation and so on, as an irregular-periodic change. Most of contemporary literature have not answered what ideological and non-ideological, social, factors have been leading to these developments of purposes of punishment in west. The study of underlying causes of this phenomenon is a controversial intricate issue and variety of arguments for and against it will not vanish anytime soon, however; the author is on the conviction that mentioned developments are not results of exclusive influence of intellectual movements of diverse schools of thought. To elucidate on, fundamental transformation of purposes of punishment are products of the constant battle waged between ideological factors and non-ideological ones. With respect to this principle presumption, this paper, by taking analytical-descriptive approach, not only illustrate how intellectual movements, from traditional retributivism to modern utilitarianism and even Christian philosophy, can influence purposes of punishment, but also explores the influence of behavioral patterns of social factors such as politics and political economy on purposes of punishment.