structure for 'Social Practice'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

25. Social Practice / D. Justice / 1. Basis of justice

[grounds for correcting unfairness in society]

42 ideas
Justice is granting the equality which unequals deserve [Plato]
     Full Idea: Justice consists of granting the 'equality' which unequals deserve to get.
     From: Plato (The Laws [c.348 BCE], 757d)
     A reaction: Beautifully simple, and hard to improve on. It shows the close link between equality and justice, but shows why they are not the same. The main debate about justice concerns the criteria for 'deserving'.
For Aristotle, debates about justice are debates about the good life [Aristotle, by Sandel]
     Full Idea: Aristotle believes that debates about justice are, unavoidably, about honour, virtue and the nature of the good life.
     From: report of Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics [c.334 BCE]) by Michael J. Sandel - Justice: What's the right thing to do? 08
     A reaction: Nozick cannot deny that his desperate attachment to freedom is a vision of the good life, and social contract theories start from the ideal of equality, which is a vision of right living.
The best cure for mutual injustice is friendship [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: If one wishes to make it so that people do not commit injustices to each other, it is enough to make them friends; for true friends do not commit injustice.
     From: Aristotle (Eudemian Ethics [c.333 BCE], 1245b28)
     A reaction: This, along with Idea 23915, offers a beautiful vision of what a society should try to achieve. There can be duplicitous apparent friends, but on the whole the best way to cure unjust relations is friendship. Imagine Jews and Arabs being friends (2023).
Justice is the order in a political community [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Justice is a political community's order.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1253a36)
     A reaction: This seems to agree with Plato, who identifies justice with harmony (in individuals as well as in communities). Fascism, however, tries to impose order without justice. Maybe justice is the health of the community.
Justice is equality for equals, and inequality for unequals [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Justice seems to be equality - not for everyone, but for equals. Justice also seems to be inequality - not for everyone, but for unequals.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1280a11)
     A reaction: He is specific that slaves, women and children are unequals, but I'm not sure how much inequality there is among the free men. In virtue theory, some men are clearly greatly superior to others. Is there a cut off point for equality?
The good is obviously justice, which benefits the whole community, and involves equality in some sense [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: In a state the good aimed at is justice; and that means what is for the benefit of the whole community; and all men believe that justice means equality in some sense.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1282b17)
     A reaction: Aristotle's idea of justice seems closer to finding what is appropriate than it does to mere equality of treatment.
The virtue of justice may be relative to a particular constitution [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: If what is just is not the same in all constitutions, there must be differences in the virtue of justice as well.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1309a37)
     A reaction: This problem has recently arisen when the state of China took full control of the westernised colony of Hong Kong. Liberals look for a more absolute concept of justice. What is justice in a slave colony?
People change laws for advantage; either there is no justice, or it is a form of self-injury [Carneades, by Lactantius]
     Full Idea: The same people often changed laws according to circumstances; there is no natural law. There is no such thing as justice or, if there is, it is the height of folly, since a man injures himself in taking thought for the advantage of others.
     From: report of Carneades (fragments/reports [c.174 BCE]) by Lactantius - Institutiones Divinae 5.16.4
     A reaction: [An argument used by Carneades on his notorious 156BCE visit to Rome, where he argued both for and against justice] This is probably the right wing view of justice. Why give other people what they want, if it is at our expense?
People differ in their social degrees, and a particular type of right applies to each [Aquinas]
     Full Idea: There are many differences of degrees among men, for instance, some are soldiers, some are priests, some are princes. Therefore some special kind of right should be alloted to them.
     From: Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologicae [1265], II-II Q57 4)
     A reaction: An objection (3), but Aquinas endorses it in his reply. In 58.10 he says striking a prince is worse that striking a commoner. The shift to the idea that everyone is supposed to be equal before the law has been slow, and we are not quite there yet.
Human life is pointless without justice [Kant]
     Full Idea: If justice perishes, there is no further point in men living on earth.
     From: Immanuel Kant (Metaphysics of Morals I: Doctrine of Right [1797], §49 Gen E)
     A reaction: I suspect that human life is also pointless if it only involves justice, and nothing else worthwhile. Are there other things so good that we might sacrifice justice to achieve them? How about maximal utilitarian happiness?
The highest ideal of social progress is a universal cosmopolitan existence [Kant]
     Full Idea: There is hope that the highest purpose of nature, a universal cosmopolitan existence, will at last be realised as the matrix within which all the original capacities of the human race may develop.
     From: Immanuel Kant (Idea for a Universal History [1784], 8th)
     A reaction: Apart from Diogenes of Sinope, Kant seems to have been the first great champion of the cosmopolitan ideal. As I write (2018) the western world is putting up growing barriers against immigrants. I think my response may be to adopt Kantian cosmopolitanism.
True justice is equality for equals and inequality for unequals [Nietzsche]
     Full Idea: 'Equality for equals, inequality for unequals' - that would be the true voice of justice.
     From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols [1889], 8.48)
Modern justice is seen as equality, apart from modest extra rewards for exceptional desert [Russell]
     Full Idea: Justice has come to be interpreted as equality, except where exceptional merit is thought to deserve an exceptional but still moderate reward.
     From: Bertrand Russell (Authority and the Individual [1949], 5)
     A reaction: Kekes rebels against this modern distortion of justice, which traditionally means everyone getting what they deserve - good or bad. The modern egalitarian view seems to be a rebellion against the harsh interpretation of the older view.
The spirit of justice needs the full attention of truth, and that attention is love [Weil]
     Full Idea: Because affliction and truth need the same kind of attention …the spirit of justice and the spirit of truth are one. The spirit of justice and truth is nothing else be a certain kind of attention, which is pure love.
     From: Simone Weil (Human Personality [1943], p.92)
     A reaction: I'm not sure about this as an observation, but as an inspiration it is very appealing, and (as so often with Weil) strikingly and attractively independent. I prefer love to arise naturally, rather than be a product of exhortation.
Justice (concerning harm) is distinct from rights (concerning inequality) [Weil]
     Full Idea: Justice is seeing that no harm is done to men. When a man cries inwardly 'Why am I being hurt?' he is being harmed. The other cry of 'Why have others got more than me?' refers to rights. We must distinguish them, and hush the second with law.
     From: Simone Weil (Human Personality [1943], p.93)
     A reaction: Her great passion is for justice, and so she downplays rights. The simple 'why am I being hurt?' has a horrible resonance in 1943. What of the hurts of disease? Are they unjust?
Only people who understand force, and don't respect it, are capable of justice [Weil]
     Full Idea: Only he who has measured the dominion of force, and knows how not to respect it, is capable of love and justice.
     From: Simone Weil (The Iliad or the Poem of Force [1940], p.212)
     A reaction: There are, of course, occasions when we are grateful to people who exercise appropriate force on our behalf. I think she was concerned with what is inappropriate.
'Social justice' is a confused idea, and inequalities need no justification [Hayek, by Swift]
     Full Idea: Hayek thinks the whole idea of social justice involves a philosophical mistake, so that inequality doesn't really need justification in the first place.
     From: report of F.A. Hayek (The Mirage of Social Justice [1976]) by Adam Swift - Political Philosophy (3rd ed) 1 'Conc'
     A reaction: It is certainly hard to justify the claim that the state of nature involves equality, making its disturbance in need of justification. But surely inequalities in government policy (such as differential income tax) need justification?
If everyone is treated with equal injustice, at least that is fair [Morgenbesser]
     Full Idea: When the police hit me over the head at the demonstration, it was unjust but at least it was fair, because they hit everybody else over the head.
     From: Sidney Morgenbesser (talk [1970]), quoted by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: An example of Morganbesser's famous wit, but this is the perfect and simplest riposte to Rawls's claim that justice is fairness. Horrific injustices can be distributed fairly, and often are, in prisons, schools, families and armies.
The social contract has problems with future generations, national boundaries, disabilities and animals [Rawls, by Nussbaum]
     Full Idea: Rawls saw four difficulties for justice in the social contract approach: future generations; justice across national boundaries; fair treatment of people with disabilities; and moral issues involving non-human animals.
     From: report of John Rawls (A Theory of Justice [1972]) by Martha Nussbaum - Creating Capabilities 4
     A reaction: These are all classic examples of groups who do not have sufficient power to negotiate contracts.
Justice concerns not natural distributions, or our born location, but what we do about them [Rawls]
     Full Idea: The natural distribution is neither just nor unjust; nor is it unjust that persons are born into society at some particular position. These are simply natural facts. What is just and unjust is the way that institutions deal with these facts.
     From: John Rawls (A Theory of Justice [1972], 17)
     A reaction: Lovely quotation. There is no point in railing against the given, and that includes what is given by history, as well as what is given by nature. It comes down to intervening, in history and in nature. How much intervention will individuals tolerate?
Capabilities: Life, Health, Safety, Mental life, Love, Planning, Joining in, Nature, Play, Control [Nussbaum, by PG]
     Full Idea: Ten Capabilities: Life (decent), Health (reproduction, shelter), Safety, Mental life (with education), Love (relationships), Planning (with free beliefs), Joining in (and non-discrimination), Nature (relations to), Play, Control (politics and property).
     From: report of Martha Nussbaum (Creating Capabilities [2011], 2) by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: She gives her crucial list in rather wordy form. To have impact it needs to be reduced to brief simple slogans.
Justice requires that the ten main capabilities of people are reasonably enabled [Nussbaum]
     Full Idea: The basic claim of my account of social justice is this: respect for human dignity requires that citizens be placed above an ample (specified) threshold of capability in all ten of the areas.
     From: Martha Nussbaum (Creating Capabilities [2011], 2)
     A reaction: [The capabilities are given, briefly, in Idea 21009] The one word that bothers me here is 'dignity'. It is very vague, and can, I think, be reduced to much clearer and more obvious concepts. A person lacks dignity when they vomit, in ordinary usage.
Capabilities are grounded in bare humanity and agency; qualifying as rational is not needed [Nussbaum]
     Full Idea: The capabilities approach grounds rights claims in bare human birth and minimal agency, not in rationality or any other specific property, something that permits it to recognise the equal human rights of people with cognitive disabilities.
     From: Martha Nussbaum (Creating Capabilities [2011], 3)
     A reaction: She says elsewhere that she also sees animals as included in the capabilities approach. This is a rejection of the Kantian grounds for rights (by a well-known Aristotelian).
Rights are not just barriers against state interference; governments must affirm capabilities of citizens [Nussbaum]
     Full Idea: A prominent idea, common in the U.S., sees rights as barriers against interfering state action. ...The Capabilities Approach, by contrast, insists that all entitlements involve an affirmative task for government, to actively support capabilities.
     From: Martha Nussbaum (Creating Capabilities [2011], 3)
     A reaction: This makes her approach very left wing, by U.S. standards, because it needs higher taxation and a degree of government paternalism. Her approach strikes me as an excellent agenda for a fairly interventionist European liberal party.
Communitarians see justice as primarily a community matter, rather than a principle [Kymlicka]
     Full Idea: Communitarians believe either that community replaces the need for principles of justice, or that the community is either the source of such principles or should play a greater role in deciding their content.
     From: Will Kymlicka (Community [1993], 'Intro')
     A reaction: [compressed] The idea that a racist or chauvinist or puritanical or insular community should decide justice for all its members sounds horrible. It drives you to liberal individualism, just thinking about it.
Justice resolves conflicts, but may also provoke them [Kymlicka]
     Full Idea: Justice can help mediate conflicts, but it also tends to creat conflicts, and to decrease the natural expression of sociability.
     From: Will Kymlicka (Community [1993], 'limits')
     A reaction: [He is discussing Michael Sandel on liberalism] Family life might not go well if all of its members continually demanded justice for themselves as individuals. Maybe our concept of justice is too individualistic? Do we need a sense of 'group' justice?
Justice corrects social faults, but also expresses respect to individuals as ends [Kymlicka]
     Full Idea: Justice is more than a remedial virtue. It does remedy defects in social co-ordination, ...but it also expresses the respect individuals are owed as ends in themselves, not as mean's to someone's good, or even to the common good.
     From: Will Kymlicka (Contemporary Political Philosophy (1st edn) [1990], 5.1)
     A reaction: That is, I take it, that justice operates at two different levels in our theoretical social thinking.
Justice combines consistency and desert; treat likes alike, judging likeness by desert [Kekes]
     Full Idea: Justice is a combination of consistency and desert. Like cases should be treated alike, and likenesses should be evaluated according to desert.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 06.3)
     A reaction: [compressed] He needs to add that at least the desert should be relevant to the events being assessed. Should people not get a fair trial if they are branded as generally 'undeserving'? Hence the case must be judged before the desert is identified.
Justice concerns how a society distributes what it prizes - wealth, rights, power and honours [Sandel]
     Full Idea: To ask whether a society is just is to ask how we distribute the things we prize - income and wealth, duties and rights, powers and opportunities, offices and honours.
     From: Michael J. Sandel (Justice: What's the right thing to do? [2009], 01)
     A reaction: There is, of course, the prior question of what things should be controlled by a society for distribution. But there is also justice in the promotional and pay structure of institutions within a society, including private institutions.
We can approach justice through welfare, or freedom, or virtue [Sandel]
     Full Idea: We have identified three ways of approaching the distribution of goods: welfare, freedom and virtue. ...and these are three ways of thinking about justice.
     From: Michael J. Sandel (Justice: What's the right thing to do? [2009], 01)
     A reaction: Virtue is Sandel's distinctively Aristotelian contribution to the problem. The best known instance of justice is punishment, which is a distribution of harms.
Distributive justice concern deserts, as well as who gets what [Sandel]
     Full Idea: Debates about distributive justice are about not only who gets what but also what qualities are worthy of honour and reward.
     From: Michael J. Sandel (Justice: What's the right thing to do? [2009], 07)
     A reaction: So the 'undeserving poor' get nuffink? Does just being a human being deserve anything? Obviously yes. That said, we can't deny the concept of 'appropriate reward'.
Should we redress wrongs done by a previous generation? [Sandel]
     Full Idea: Can we ever have a moral responsibility to redress wrongs committed by a previous generation?
     From: Michael J. Sandel (Justice: What's the right thing to do? [2009], 07)
     A reaction: Just asking for a friend. It seems to depend on how close we feel to the previous generation. Regretting the crime committed by a beloved parent is one thing. Despising the crime committed by some right bastard who shares my nationality is another.
Work is not fair if it is negotiated, even in a fair situation, but if it suits the nature of the worker [Sandel]
     Full Idea: For the libertarian free exchange for labour is fair; for Rawls it requires fair background conditions; for Aristotle, for the work to be just it must be suited to the nature of the workers who perform it.
     From: Michael J. Sandel (Justice: What's the right thing to do? [2009], 08)
     A reaction: [compressed] Aristotle's idea is powerful, and Sandel performs a great service in drawing attention to it. Imagine the key negotiation in an interview being whether this particular work suits your nature!
Justice is about how we value things, and not just about distributions [Sandel]
     Full Idea: Justice is not only about the right way to distribute things. It is also about the right way to value things.
     From: Michael J. Sandel (Justice: What's the right thing to do? [2009], 10)
     A reaction: This is Sandel's distinctively Aristotelian contribution to the justice debate - with which I have great sympathy. And, as he argues, the values of things arise out of assessing their essential natures.
The very concept of democracy entails a need for justice [Grayling]
     Full Idea: The concept of democracy - embodying the principles of participation and equal concern - entails that social justice is a mandatory aim.
     From: A.C. Grayling (The Good State [2020], 2)
     A reaction: The idea that democracy entails participation in any direct way is what the right wing reject. Sustained participation would presumably entail various sorts of justice.
Rights and justice are only the last resorts of a society, something to fall back on [Wolff,J]
     Full Idea: Justice is the last virtue of society, or at least the last resort. Rights, or considerations of justice, are like an insurance policy: something offering security to fall back on.
     From: Jonathan Wolff (An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) [2006], 6 'Transcending')
     A reaction: I like this. He points out that a good family doesn't talk of rights and justice. We want a friendly harmonious society, with safety nets.
You don't need a complete theory of justice to see that slavery is wrong [Sen]
     Full Idea: It was the diagnosis of an intolerable injustice in slavery that made abolition an overwhelming priority, and this did not require a search for a consensus on what a perfectly just society would look like.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], Intro 'Classical')
     A reaction: This illustrates Sen's key points, that we should focus on injustices, which are obvious, and that designing a totally just society has little relevance to justice in practice (which is what matters). Well said.
Practical justice concerns not only ideals, but ways to achieve them [Sen]
     Full Idea: A theory of justice that can serve as the basis of practical reason must include ways of judging how to reduce injustice and advance justice, rather than aiming only at the characterisation of perfectly just societies.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], Pref 'What')
     A reaction: Sounds simple, but this is Amartya Sen's revolutionary new idea - that justice is not just ideals and opportunities, but what sort of life people actually end up with.
Our institutions should promote justice, rather than embodying it [Sen]
     Full Idea: We have to seek institutions that promote justice, rather than treating the institutions as themselves manifestations of justice.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], 03 'Institutions')
     A reaction: The best quote I can find for summarising Sen's view. He criticises Rawls and others for trying to design institutions that embody justice. Our legal system promotes justice. Do our schools and hospitals? The Department for the Promotion of Justice?
We must focus on removing manifest injustice, not just try to design a perfect society [Sen]
     Full Idea: The demands of justice must give priority to the removal of manifest injustice, rather than concentrating on the long-distance search for the perfectly just society.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], 12 'Disability')
     A reaction: So the point is not to understand the world, but to change it? I'd want to put in a word for the theoretical and idealised project, which I see in terms of writing the perfect constitution. You can't just pick off injustices, perceived intuitively.
If justice needs public reasoning, which needs democracy, then justice and democracy are linked [Sen]
     Full Idea: If the demands of justice can be assessed only with the help of public reasoning, and that is constitutively related to the idea of democracy, then there is an intimate connection between justice and democracy.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], 15 'Content')
     A reaction: I suspect that he argued early on that rationality required many perspectives in order to later mount this defence of democracy.
Justice can be seen as fairness or entitlement or desert [Swift]
     Full Idea: The three influential conceptions of justice are as fairness (Rawls), as entitlement (Nozick), and as desert.
     From: Adam Swift (Political Philosophy (3rd ed) [2014], 1 'Concept')