Study Notes on Justice by Dr. Sushant Verma
PSIR OPTIONAL JUSTICE BY DR. SUSHANT VERMA
Introduction
Justice has been central to political philosophy for over two thousand years.
Political thinkers have depicted the 'good society' as a 'just' society.
There is significant disagreement on the meaning of justice, as it is an ‘essentially contested’ concept.
No settled, objective concept of justice exists; only competing concepts.
In everyday contexts, justice is linked to laws and often perceived as a quality of law.
Example: Major social movements often oppose unjust laws (e.g., apartheid in South Africa).
Justice is typically associated with impartiality, fairness, and moral correctness.
It represents a moral judgment regarding the distribution of rewards and punishments.
Ultimately, it is about giving each person what he or she is 'due,' with impartiality and fairness being critical aspects.
Evolution of the Idea of Justice
Plato’s Republic contains one of the earliest accounts of justice.
Plato's view: An ideal state embodies justice where every individual fulfills their duty diligently.
Aristotle emphasized justice through equality, proportionality, and social equilibrium.
After classical antiquity, ideas of justice were often linked to divinity, natural law, or tradition.
Secularization in Europe (Renaissance to Industrial Revolution) led to new perspectives on justice.
Justice became firmly rooted in the framework of the modern nation-state.
Justice shifted from a religious or traditional basis to principles upheld by the state for societal regulation.
Justice adapts as social consciousness evolves.
Historical justifications (like slavery, caste discrimination, gender inequality) are now deemed unjust.
The contemporary problem of justice involves allocating resources fairly under scarcity conditions.
Justice pertains to the equitable distribution of benefits and burdens in society.
Dimensions of Justice
Legal Justice
Legal justice applies in two contexts:
Justice according to law: Focuses on administering justice based on existing law without questioning law’s validity.
Law according to justice: Examines whether laws align with moral justice.
Legal justice addresses how laws impose penalties and allocate compensation for wrongdoing or harm.
Requires a public set of rules developed and enforced impartially.
Justice conforms with existing laws; however, laws must also have a moral basis.
Laws that violate moral human values can obstruct social progress and may be overthrown.
Example: Laws prohibiting women from voting lack moral justification despite fair processes.
Political Justice
Political justice concerns transforming political institutions, processes, and rights in line with current justice conceptions.
Key attributes include:
Establishing democratic institutions that accurately represent the people rather than privileged classes.
Guaranteeing political freedoms, including free thought and speech, peaceful protests, and fair political representation.
Socio-Economic Justice
Includes social justice and economic justice.
Economic justice emphasizes eliminating exploitation of vulnerable populations and ensuring dignified living standards.
Social justice aims to prevent material and moral benefits from being monopolized by privileged classes, promoting inclusivity for the marginalized.
Advocates for safeguarding the dignity and rights of weaker sections and ensuring they benefit from societal growth.
Social justice encourages equal opportunity regardless of caste, class, religion, or gender discrimination.
Procedural and Substantive Justice
Procedural Justice (Formal Justice):
Focuses on the fair process for how distributive actions are carried out without discrimination.
Essential for maintaining mutual relationships among individuals and groups.
Substantive Justice:
Concentrates on the fairness of the outcomes themselves rather than solely the processes.
Outcome reflects equity in terms of human welfare while considering societal structures.
Types of Procedural Justice
Perfect Procedural Justice: Provides methods guaranteeing fair outcomes.
Imperfect Procedural Justice: Identifies fair outcomes but lacks methods to ensure their occurrence.
Pure Procedural Justice: Recognizes no criterion beyond the fairness of the process.
Nozick's Theory of Justice:
In Anarchy, State and Utopia, he posits justice is based on fair acquisition and transfer.
Historical principles govern entitlement based on past actions over certain goals.
End-State Theories of Justice
Propose controls over individuals' interactions without consideration of procedural fairness.
Marxist Theory: Discusses justice related to labor contributions in socialist and communist societies.
Under scarcity, justice can inhibit community, while abolishing private property can create a cooperative culture.
Themes in Distributive Justice
Involves how society distributes goods among its members based on need, rights, and desert.
Stressing equality leads to societal efficiency and cohesive membership, preventing unrest.
David Miller outlines principles for social justice based on need, rights, and deserts.
Need
Advocated by socialists emphasizing fulfilling basic needs for human dignity.
Implies moral obligations for wealthier nations to assist poorer communities, indicating a need for global equitable resource distribution.
Rights
Focuses on entitlements earned through labor, influencing classical liberal belief systems.
Property rights connect individual contributions with ownership claims.
Desert
Represents intrinsic, natural merits that individuals carry within social and moral frameworks.
Associated with conservative views on societal hierarchies and free-market capitalism.
John Rawls: A Theory of Justice (1971)
Rawls reintroduces normative principles in political philosophy.
Proposes that a just society encapsulates virtues, asserting justice is the foremost virtue of social institutions.
Discusses ‘primary goods’ as universal means for achieving human goals, emphasizing justice revolves around equal distribution.
Distinguishes between the entitlement theory of justice based on procedural methods versus the difference principle focused on beneficial outcomes.
Critiques processes that prioritize collective happiness at the expense of individual suffering.
Methodology of Rawls’ Theory
Develops his theory using the concept of the 'original position' where individuals select just principles detached from personal interests (behind a 'veil of ignorance').
Ensures rational negotiators prioritize just outcomes, particularly for the worst-off when deciding principles of justice.
Advocates that rational individuals working toward consensus construct fair, stable societies.
Critique and Modifications from Communitarian Standpoint
Communitarians argue that Rawls’ principles abstract individual choice from social contexts.
Contend that personal identity and moral frameworks emerge within communal environments, not in isolation.
Emphasizes that moral philosophies must align with community values and structures.
Criticism highlights the disconnect between individual rights and community responsibilities.
Feminist Perspective and Critique
Feminist scholars, such as Susan Moller Okin, converge that Rawls’ theory neglects intra-family inequalities.
Calls for reevaluation of the familial structure in context to collective justice evaluations.
Amartya Sen's Capability Approach
Critiques Rawls for focusing on resources rather than actual freedoms enjoyed by individuals.
Advocates assessing capability variations based on personal circumstances to realize justice effectively.
Cosmopolitanism: Global Perspective on Justice
Advocates for moral obligations extending beyond national borders, presenting justice as a global enterprise.
Critiques Rawls for not applying his principles universally, arguing for a cosmopolitan justice better suited to address global disparities.