There are absolute
Some platonic ideal of values that can be
Justice is imprecise
Injustice is much clearer and
easier to establish
No single rule to answer all
questions of justice, somewhat
dissimilar from Plato
Must be some position between
other positions of injustice
golden mean
Corrective Justice punishing
purpose of something should be,
Role of politics is to Polity must dedicate
we need to know what it is for
promote the good life itself to advancing virtue
Constitutions that Constitution not just
Purpose of law is to advance
advance the common confined to majoritarian
virtue, to promote good actions
good are just rule, or individual rights,
Those that benefit the but those that foster the
rules are unjust skills of a virtuous life
justice, to be emulated emulated
and strived towards Eg. A beautiful object is
That there was some beautiful because it
overriding idea of justice matches some objective
standard of beauty
that existed above local
norms and values A good will is good not
because of what it effects
If we do something for
of accomplishes, now
an external reason,
because its fitness to
we are not truly free.
attain some proposed
What is a person due? end: it is only through its
Obey your thirst
About rewarding those who willing, i.e. It is good in Oversimplified conception of
live justly 2. Justice is honorific to itself how people function
reason about a particular Plato How do you control a
practice, about a minimal state like this?
those who do wrong particular law, should be Attacking the comparison
Distributive Justice - each what virtues we should with slavery
person receives what they be rewarding What of welfare? Ignores the
justly deserve interests of most vulnerable
Hypothetical imperative If you want Critiques
to avoid jail, dont commit crimes
Kant
Categorical imperative do not steal
Aristotle
Must act for the sake of the act
itself.
The valid justification for doing the
right thing is that youre under a
duty to do so Profoundly individualistic
- You own yourself
In order to work out what the
- You own the fruits of your
1. Justice is teleological labour
defining rights requires - Someone taking the fruits of
us to figure out the your labour is equivalent to
Consequentialism Justice Utulitarianism
purpose of a particular owning a part of me
social practice - Equivalent to being owned
and the virtuous life
by another person or by - the
state
teleological approach
- Tax is comparable to slavery
Libertarianism
The fundamental
objective of morality
should be maximising
What determines morality total happiness
should be the Everyone likes
consequences of actions, pleasure, and dislikes
rather than motive or pain
purpose
Think back to Dudley v
Stephens from last week Principles of acquisition how
Blunt utilitarianism says What if everyone gathered to do you acquire property not
maximise happiness make a decision on what a already owned?
just society would look like? Principles of transfer how do
John What if we didnt know who we you transfer ownership of
Critiques
Wals were, or what our lot in life property to someone else?
would be? Principles of rectification how
2. Social and economic do you restore property
1. Each person is to have equalities to be arranged so that: unjustly acquired?
A Theory of Justice - 1971 an equal right to the most
extensive total system of - a) greatest benefit to the
Treats human beings as means equal basic liberties least advantaged, consistent with
rather than ends to themselves- compatible with a similar the just savings principle (how
arent inherently valuable, are system of liberty for all much you would be willing to
just used as means to value save at the varying stages of
- only treat them as society)
experiencers of happiness - - b) all offices and positions open
why is *increase* in happiness to all under conditions of fair
good compared to distribution equality of opportunity
of happiness and welfare
principles
of justice
individual analogy
is false my
happiness cant be People are
replaced by others Principles of justice are the self-interested, but
original agreement, the social cant divorce those
Where does this conception of principles from their
contract.
happiness being good come own positions
What free and rational persons
from?
would accept in an initial
position of equality
How can we know social
Important to distinguish
consequences properly in a contract
peoples self-interested
complicated world?
perceptions on justice from
objective, rational principles
How do know what people
actually want versus what they
say they want?
Critiques
What do you think people might
agree in these position?
You are making a
decision from behind the If you dont know what
veil of ignorance race/gender/class you are, what
Original You dont know what race, do you think a just world looks
position class, sex, gender you like?
are. What country youre
living in, what time period Take a few minutes, try and think
of some principles you might
Why would people actually generate from this position.
decide for the principles of
justice?
Why should they prefer liberty
to equality?
Assumes various aspects Fails to recognize separate
about how people make and individual persons
decisions cant separate from How can we know if a
interests such as race and rejection of
pleasure has value without
class utulitarianism
knowing whether it is just?
What is right must come
prior to what is good