Vendor selection and uncertainty

Vendor selection is of strategic importance in any industry. This paper uses fuzzy tools for vendor selection to improve decision-making through a more systematic and logical approach. Expert opinion is portrayed by allocating different fuzzy weights to the linguistic data in the form of triangular fuzzy numbers (TFN). The scores are evaluated using fuzzy arithmetic operations and the index of optimism is used to evaluate the vendors. Also, to bring in consistency in the evaluation, results are compared with the fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS), another well known multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) approach affected by uncertainty. This concept, if adopted, can be used for any industry where vendor selection is based on a set criteria and linguistic judgement variables

Rethinking theoretical foundations of retributive theory of punishment

THE LEGAL theory of punishment, which has based its foundational edifice on the bedrock of revenge, as a justification to punish, has been formulated in its best form by Immanuel Kant and is famously styled as the retributive theory of punishment. Retributive theory categorically asserts that it is the criminal guilt, which is the real basis of punishment, irrespective of the social utility of such punishment. The retributive theory is primarily based on the ‘justice model’ wherein, as Kant maintains, guilt is a necessary condition for the legitimate infliction of punishment. Thus, punishment of innocent, in retributive scheme of things, is a conceptual and moral aberration. The basic and core foundational elements of retributive theory are right, justice and desert. This monograph attempts to deal with all the three aspects. However, before stepping into these elaborations, it is more important to ‘clear the air’ and disentangle the labyrinthine complexity, which has crept in legal theory about retributive theory. This is due to unwarranted discourse, especially but not only, by Indian legal theorists as well as justices in their variegated writings. It is pertinent to examine some of such unsubstantiated and off the cuff remarks made by some authors, which can be described as ‘folklore jurisprudence’ (borrowing the expression from Upendra Baxi) about the retributive theory of punishment