VOLUME 72 NUMBER 3 MAY 1992 BOSTON UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW RETHINKING MENTAL STATES KENNETH W. SIMONS* INTRODUCTION .................................................. 464 I. THE REIGNING HIERARCHY: AN EXPOSITION AND BRIEF C RITIQUE .................................................. 468 A. Crim inal Law ......................................... 468 B . Torts .................................................. 471 C . Critique ............................................... 473 1. Equating Knowledge With Purpose ................. 473 2. The Narrow Distinction Between Recklessness and K nowledge ......................................... 474 3. Punitive Damages .................................. 475 II. A NEW CONCEPTUAL MODEL .............................. 476 A. Generally .................................... 476 B. The Independence of Belief and Desire .................. 478 C. Recklessness: Belief, Desire, or Conduct? ................. 482 D. Reckless Indifference .................................... 486 E., Why the Reigning Hierarchy (Almost) Works ............ 490 III. MENTAL STATES IN NORMATIVE CONTEXT ................. 495 A. Retributive Analysis .................................... 495 1. R esults ............................................ 496 2. Circum stances ...................................... 499 3. Conduct ........................................... 502 B. Utilitarian Analysis ..................................... 503 C. Rights Analysis: The Example of Intentional Discrim ination ......................................... 515 * Kenneth W. Simons, Associate Dean and Professor of Law, Boston University. Earlier versions of this paper were presented to faculty workshops at Boston University School of Law, the U.C.L.A. Law and Philosophy Discussion Group, the University of San Diego School of Law, and the University of Southern California Law Center. I thank those participants for helpful questions and comments. In particular I thank Larry Alexander, Bob Bone, Maria CeloCruz, Dick Craswell, Josh Dressier, Steve Gerrard, Chip Lupu, Stephen Morse, Larry Sager, and Larry Yackle. I owe a special thanks to Peter Arenella, Eric Blumenson, David Dolinko, Stan Fisher, and Steve Munzer for their painstaking critical suggestions. Lisa Haybeck, Anita Lalwani, and Suzanne Michaud provided excellent research assistance. HeinOnline -- 72 B.U. L. Rev. 463 19922