Theories of justice

Theories of justice

1. Theories of justice

2. Some Theories of Justice Comprehensive/ Principle Based Contextual/ Casuistical Utilitarianism Michael Walzer John Rawls Communitarians Robert Nozick

3. Types of Justice Procedural justice Level playing field Equality before the law Due process Distributive justice Equal opportunity Desert Outcome based versions (patterned principles) Historical theories Rights theories Compensatory justice Retributive justice Transitional justice

4. Rawls’s Social Contract Connects moral choice (consent) and rational choice: the original position and the veil of ignorance as a means of preventing the principles of justice from being infected with self-interest Hypothetical contract that identifies the most basic principles of justice This contract approach could also (and has been) used to justify utilitarianism.

5. Rawls on the Just State Justice as equity A just society is a society founded on just principles. A just society would be a just society Equity implies distributive justice There is an equitable distribution of primary social goods. power, Opportunities freedoms and privileges, basics of self-respect (e.g. equal political representation)

6. Rawls’s Principles of Justice Everyone should have the same right to the broadest global system of equal fundamental freedoms compatible with a similar system of freedoms for all. Social and economic inequalities must be organized in such a way that: they benefit the less favored as much as possible (principle of difference) and are allocated to posts and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality chances Lexical order of principles (the priority of freedom) Utilitarianism, Rawls principles, egalitarianism Desert: defined by the principles of justice

7. Rawls on the Just State What is a Fair Society? Would a fair society would be one that any rational, self-interested person would want to join? Not quite. They will be biased to their own talents.

8. Rawls on the Just State The veil of ignorance Suppose they choose from behind a veil of ignorance where they don't know what their talents are or where they stand in society. They would choose a fair society for everyone because they would have to live with their choice So, a just society is one that any rational and self-interested person behind the veil of ignorance would like to join.

9. Rawls on the Just State Initial position How would we choose? We choose the basic social conditions that determine our outlook for life. We can only choose once We would follow a principle of maximin choice choose the setting where your worst outcome is better than your worst outcome in any other setting We would not give up fundamental rights and freedoms

10. Rawls on the Just State Initial position Rawls is a social contract theorist By forming a social contract, we decide on the basic structure of the company. We do this as rational and interested voters, behind the veil of ignorance. This prime position Rawls calls out The Original Position

11. Critiques of Social Contract Theories Communitarianism: the authority of the State does not depend on the consent of individuals; individuals rather depend on the state for their realization and their identity (Aristotle, Hegel) Feminism: Since women are normally expected to focus on private (family) matters, they are excluded from full participation in the social contract.

12. Minimal State (Entitlement) Theory: Robert Nozick We have the right to use our property as we see fit. The legitimate power of the state is limited to preventing damage and protecting property rights Imposing taxes for anything other than protection (e.g. to enforce a pattern of wealth redistribution) is unfair because it ignores how goods are acquired fairly through trade, labor, gifts, etc. .

13. Nozick’s Entitlement Theory Libertarian approach to justice Based on a Lockean conception of property

14. 3 Principles Principle of transfer: whatever is acquired with justice can be transferred freely. Principle of Fair Initial Acquisition: A description of how people initially come to own things that can be transferred according to principle. Injustice rectification principle: how to deal with shares if they have been acquired or transferred unfairly.

15. Historical vs. End-Result Principles Historical principles: distributive principles that depend on how a distribution is born. Current Time Interval Principles (Bottom Line Principles): The fairness of a distribution is determined by how things are distributed, based on structural principles. The theory of rights results in an unstructured distribution.

16. Ambition vs. Endowment Unlike Rawls's theory, Nozick's theory is not "endowment-sensitive" but "ambition-sensitive" According to Nozick , only the minimalist state is the only morally justified state Execution of contracts Protection against force and fraud

17. Intuitive argument for the entitlement theory D1: Rule R1 provides a fair distribution of goods. D2: State resulting from the movement of D1 according to the P principle (s). If D1 is a fair distribution and the exchange of goods that results in D2 is not forced, then D2 is fair.

18. Amartya Sen : “Development as Freedom” What should be distributed are: Elementary functions: "do" and "Beings " having access to adequate food and shelter that can be personal freedom, income and wealth. Complex functions: "acts" and "beings" as have self-respect and be able to participate in political communities that depend on factors independent of resource ownership.

19. Martha Nussbaum: “Capabilities Approach” Central human functional capabilities that ought to be distributed: Life Bodily health Bodily integrity Senses , imagination, and thought Emotions Practical reason Affiliation toward other species and as the basis for self-respect and dignity Other species Play Control over your political and material environment

20. Sen’s and Nussbaum’s Capabilities Approaches For Sen , a person who cannot perform basic and complex functions cannot lead a decent human life; for Nussbaum, a person who lacks skills cannot lead a decent life . Political and economic institutions should facilitate and / or provide opportunities for people to exercise functions ( Sen ) or capacities (Nussbaum).

21. Scope, Shape, and Currency of Capabilities Approaches Scope: These approaches cover at least all people . Form: Capability approaches are based on hybrids of equality and sufficiency . Money: Capacity-based approaches distribute opportunities to exercise what is fundamentally human (core functions or capacities).