What is a just society?

What are the values of a just society?

Freedom and Liberty Fairness and Equality Satisfaction of basic needs of everyone Peace, Cohesiveness and Happiness

Individualism Vs Collectivism Economic growth Vs development and Ecology Many of these all important values often conflict How to reconcile?

 What should be the basic structure of society? How should the Political, Economic, Social institutions be arranged? How should these major institutions distribute fundamental rights and duties? How to determine the division of advantages from social cooperation?

 The world is full of inequalities.. Is it not unfair that some people are born rich and some are born poor? How bad are inequalities which are not the fault of people who suffer from them? Is this just a matter of bad luck? Should anything be done to reduce this inequalities?

 Will not equality cost efficiency? What when inequalities are imposed?
Discrimination based on ethnicity, caste, class, gender etc.

What justifies Inequality of opportunity?

Inequalities in wealth, health, education, and development between rich and poor countries

Will equality of opportunity solve all the problems? If so, what happens to Natural talent & Differences in ability? What is Social justice? Is social justice possible in world scale? Global justice? Or only at national scale?

 Some maintain that justice stems from God's will or command (Locke) Others believe that justice is inherent in nature itself Still others believe that justice consists of rules common to all humanity that emerge out of some sort of consensus.
This sort of justice is often thought of as something higher than a society's legal system. It is in those cases where an action seems to violate some universal rule of conduct that we are likely to call it "unjust."

Types of Justice
Retributive Justice
Criminal justice principles of retributive or restorative justice shape our response to activity that violates a society's rules of "fair play"

Compensatory justice
Just way of compensating people for what they lost when they were wronged by others

Distributive Justice: Our Concern

Sharing the Benefits and burdens determine what counts as a "fair share" of the public assets

Distributive Justice
The central question of distributive justice is the question of how the benefits and burdens of our society are to be distributed.
Justice involves giving each person a fair share

 What is to be distributed?
Wealth (through inheritance tax?) Opportunities (through equal opportunities?) Income (through income tax?)

To whom are good to be distributed?

Individual persons Groups of persons (family) Classes (oppressed class through reservation)

Bases for Distribution

On what basis should goods be distributed?
Equality- Egalitarianism Needs and abilities- Socialism Free Choice - Libertarianism Contribution Merit and Achievement

Egalitarian Theories
All human beings are equal in some fundamental respect In virtue of this equality each person has an equal claim to societys goods and services The only relevant property is simple possession of humanity Human differences are contingent and therefore irrelevant Basic principle: distribution of burdens and benefits are considered just to the extent they are equal (just = equal) Criticisms
Unduly restricts individual freedom No consideration for need, ability, effort May conflict with what people deserve Anti productive

Equality???
Political equality refers to equal participation in the legislative process, equal civil liberties, and equal rights to due process Economic equality refers to equality of income and wealth and equality of opportunity
Economic equality is neither possible nor desirable

Economic inequality partly responsible for social inequality Egalitarian equality may hold good for political equality

Socialist Theories
Free market exchange based on private property rights corrupts a workers relation both to his or her own product and to fellow workers Justice requires satisfaction of fundamental human needs that has a higher social priority then the protection of economic freedom or rights Principle of distribution from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs
Work should be distributed according to ability Benefits so produced should be used to promote human happiness and well being

Benefits and burdens distributed in the model of a family

Criticisms
Does not recognize efforts Anti productive Paternalistic (anti freedom) basic right of people to make choices and take responsibility for their own actions would be overridden by a principles based on abilities and needs No room for free choice
Occupation will be determined by abilities not by free choice Goods will be distributed by need not by free choice

World does not run in the model of a family

Libertarian Theories
Emphasizes rights to social and economic liberty Processes, procedures or mechanisms for insuring that liberty rights are recognized in economic practice Contribution people make to the economic system are freely chosen (not just by ability) fundamental right to own and dispense with their labor as they choose People do not deserve equal economic returns as they do not make equal contribution

Entitlement theory of Justice

Robert Nozick there are certain basic rights to liberty people are entitled to that should not be interfered with by any institution in society
Principle of Justice in acquisition Principle of Justice in transfer Principle of Justice in holding

Govt. should only protect these fundamental rights or entitlements

Criticism
No consideration for unequal opportunities and people born into unfavorable circumstances

Capitalist Theories
Justice based on contribution benefits should be distributed according to the value of the contribution the individual makes to a society, a task, a group, or an exchange How the value of the contribution by each individual is to be measured?
Individual effort? Productivity?

A comprehensive theory of Justice

John Rawls developed a conception of justice as fairness in his classic work A Theory of Justice

Using elements of both Kantian and utilitarian philosophy, and considerations to political and economic equality, a minimum standard of living, needs, ability, effort and freedom, he has described a method for the moral evaluation of social and political institutions.

John Rawls (1921-2002 )

Justice as fairness
While justice in the broader sense is often thought of as transcendental, justice as fairness is more context-bound. Justice is action that pays due regard to the proper interests, property, and safety of one's fellows Parties concerned with fairness typically strive to work out something comfortable and adopt procedures that resemble rules of a game. They work to ensure that people receive their "fair share" of benefits and burdens and adhere to a system of "fair play."

 Consider the opening paragraphs of John Rawls classic A Theory of Justice (1971): Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. A theory however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue; likewise laws and institutions no matter how efficient and well-arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust. Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many. Therefore in a just society the liberties of equal citizenship are taken as settled; the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests. The only thing that permits us to acquiesce in an erroneous theory is the lack of a better one; analogously, an injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even greater injustice. Being first virtues of human activities, truth and justice are uncompromising. These propositions seem to express our intuitive conviction of the primacy of justice.

 Thought experiment Hypothetical situation of developing a totally new social contract for today's society (total restructuring) Fair contract minimize your personal biases and prejudices. How? Veil of ignorance
Behind this veil, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes.

Behind such a veil of ignorance all individuals are simply specified as rational, free, and morally equal beings. But you do know that in the "real world there would be differences

Principles of justice
The safest principles will provide for the highest minimum standards of justice in the projected society. How to work out that principle?

 To use a more mundane illustration, imagine that you had the task of determining how to divide a cake fairly among a group of individuals. What rule or method should govern the cutting? A simple one would be to let the person who does the cutting receive the last piece. This would lead that person to cut all pieces as equally as possible in order to receive the best remaining share. Of course if the pieces were cut unequally, someone would get the largest share, but if you are the cutter, you can hardly rely on that piece being left over at the end.

Two rules
Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with similar liberty for others. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both:
a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage and to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged b) attached to positions and offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity

Critics of Principles of Justice

Strict egalitarians: dont treat anyone differently Utilitarians: doesnt maximize utility Libertarian: infringes on liberty through taxation, etc. Desert-based theorists argue to reward hard work even when it doesnt help the disadvantaged Does not provide sufficient rewards for ambition It is more cohesive principle of social justice