Why should punishment not be viewed as an "eye-for-an-eye" procedure?

Punishment should not be viewed as an "eye-for-an-eye" procedure because it is not ethically justified. The principle of an "eye-for-an-eye" suggests that any wrongdoing should be met with an equivalent punishment, which raises significant ethical concerns. This approach can lead to a cycle of retribution and vengeance, rather than promoting healing, understanding, and positive behavior change.

A focus on ethical justification considers the broader implications of punitive actions, including their impact on relationships, community cohesion, and the potential for further harm. Rather than fostering learning and growth for the individual who misbehaved, this mentality can perpetuate negativity and resentment, ultimately hindering the educational and developmental process.

In contrast, approaches that seek to understand the underlying causes of behavior and promote constructive outcomes through restorative practices are seen as more ethical and effective. They emphasize rehabilitation and learning rather than simply inflicting punishment, thereby creating a more supportive environment for all individuals involved.