NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Justice

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Paradox of Justice

• Small volcanic island has two villages, “South Town” (Pop 300) and “North Village” (Pop 500).

• Threat of devastating volcanic eruption is great; both towns cooperate to invest in a large life-saving vessel on the nearby mainland coast

• Sudden eruption occurs; time enough for vessel to make only one round trip. Which village should be saved? Why?

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Fairness

• Would it be “fair” always to privilege the larger town over the smaller? Why/why not?

• Invokes more than utility; can’t say you have violated anyone’s rights

• Problem is one of distribution of benefits and burdens (including risk)

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Justice as Fairness

• Aristotle defined this dilemma as the problem of “justice” -- treating equals equally, or giving to each his due

• We need a formula or procedure for “fairness” -- for deciding who deserves what, or how things are to be apportioned

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Formulae for Distribution

(which one do you think is the fairest – the most “just”?)

• “to each an equal share” (egalitarianism)• “to each according to that person’s need”

(Marxism?)• “to each according to the persons effort”• “to each according to that persons contribution

or merit”• “to each according to his or her success (at free

market negotiations)”

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Two Conceptions of Justice

Aristotle also suggested we distinguish between:• Retributive justice – crime, punishment, law enforcement

(Billy Budd, capital punishment debates)

• Distributive justice – how are benefits and burdens (positive duties) handed out in society? (John Rawls reading for today; equal opportunity cases)

• But note that a formula for just and fair “distribution” in general could apply to punishment and law enforcement (so retributive is a special, important case of the second item)

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Justice and Moral Theoriesa) Utilitarian: “justice” is the distribution of benefits and

burdens that maximizes social welfare. Punishments should prevent and deter crime to promote the public good, and should also be proportional to the wrongs committed.

b) Duty/Deontological – “the Social Contract” (Kant and Rawls): distribution of benefits and burdens (including punishment for wrongdoing) should follow a formula that is fair in the sense that all affected by it could give their rational consent. Such a formula would respect the autonomy of each individual as a chooser and decision-maker.

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

Kant on Justice

The distinction we have seen in Kant and Mill between Positive Duties (imperfect) and Negative Duties (perfect), is also described by Kant as a distinction between:

• Duties of Virtue: the positive or imperfect duties to do good for others

• Duties of Justice: the negative, or perfect duties to refrain from doing harm or evil

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

From Kant to Rawls

• Rawls’s Theory of Justice is an extended essay on Kant’s CI3 – the “Kingdom of Ends”

• Kant: moral agent is both a legislator and a citizen under the moral laws

• Rawls: we need to define this legislative capacity carefully as the foundation of justice – the “original position” – the overall thrust of Social Contract theory (from Hobbes & Locke to Rousseau and Kant)

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

The “Original Position”• Kant’s CI3 – what sort of laws would citizens

make?• Resulting legislation is not fair if prejudiced

unduly by knowledge of one’s social position• Presume a “veil of ignorance” – legislators are

ignorant of their own social status when defining laws, institutions, procedures

• This is a concrete application of Kant’s “pure practical Reason,” or the “rational Will”

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

John Rawls – the Theory of Justice

Justice is a virtue of social institutions that reward or benefit achievers (and presumably punish wrongdoers) according to principles that:

1) provide equal liberty for all participants in the system2) provide equal opportunity or access to the means of achieving

social goods (education, status, wealth, etc.) In particular:a) such principles may justify the resulting differences in social

status arising from the free pursuit of goods and the self development of talents which work to the common advantage (and hence could win the common consent) of everyone – including the least advantaged – living under this system

NE 203: Dr. Lucas

How does this Work?

• Two principles of justice emerge from the definition of “rational choice” in the “original position”

• These principles, and the procedure (like the CI-procedure) provide a useful guide, a test of the adequacy of actual practices

Examples: • “Jim Crow” laws• laissez-faire capitalism