| << Chapter < Page | Chapter >> Page > |
The table below summarize much of the discussion in this module to this point. It also refers to some point that are beyond the scope of this module. For example, Sandel provides a communitarian criticism of Rawls. Rawls’ self can be detached from its social surroundings and defined in terms of rational self-interest. Sandel argues that justice must confront more robust selves or individuals who are inseparable from their social context. Hence, the social contract itself (or Rawls’ original position) must always factor in the projects and social relations that partially constitute who we are. Second, Walzer argues that there are spheres of justice that correspond to different practical areas; each sphere has its own distinct principle or procedure of distribution and these different procedures cannot be reduced to one all-inclusive view. So economic goods can be distributed consequentially but political goods must have some kind of right-based or deontological procedure. Third and finally, Nussbaum and Sen see justice as following from a more robust conception of human dignity that is filled out by substantive freedoms or what they term capabilities. M. Nussbaum. (2006). Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, species Membership . Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press.
|
Root meaning |
Key Features |
Kinds and Senses |
Useful Frameworks |
Cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Giving each what is due—places justice under the debits/credit metaphor | Pattern Approaches: Justice = the conformity of current distribution to an ideal pattern
|
Distributive : dividing burdens and benefits of social cooperation fairly. Retributive : fair and impartial administration of rewards and punishments | Social Contract Version One
|
Hughes
|
Justice as fairness and justice as equality
|
Historical Process View : if the current distribution results from a process free of coercion and deception, then it is just.
|
Compensatory : fair compensation for wrongful injuries Administrative : Impartial and fair administration of rules and procedures (consistent with due process) | Rawls Version: Social Contract under veil of ignoranceRational Self-Interest (maximize primary goods) + Veil of Ignorance (Ignorance of natural talents, gender, social class, economic and political status, etc.) = Procedural Justice as spelled out in two principles:1. Equal Liberties Principle : “Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others.”2. Difference Principle : “social and economic inequalities…are just only if they result in compensating benefits for everyone, and in particular for the least advantaged members of society.” (Rawls, Theory of Justice in Beachamp and Bowie Business Ethics, 561.) | Incident at Morales
|
Metaphor: Justice emerges out of a social contract
|
In general processes of acquisition and transfer must be liberty-preserving or free from coercion and deception | Justice can be treated as a right essential to autonomy, vulnerable to a standard threat and feasible in that it does not deprive the correlative duty-holder of anything essential Utilitarianism : Justice is intrinsically valuable but only as a part of happiness (especially happiness of the greatest number) | These two principle allow for maximizing primary goods (=rational self-interest) under a veil of ignorance according to RawlsPrimary Goods:
|
CEO Pay
|
Justice has been characterized in different ways as a …
|
Spheres of Justice (Walzer): There are several distinct spheres of practical activity, each with its own rule of distributive justice. (Examples: Educational, Political, Economic) | One Laptop Per Child
|
Notification Switch
Would you like to follow the 'Collection of ethics modules for civis' conversation and receive update notifications?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|