Justice

What is Justice?

Justice, in its broadest sense, refers to treating individuals fairly. It means that people receive what they ‘deserve.’ But what exactly does ‘deserve’ mean? This question has puzzled philosophers and thinkers for centuries.

The Roots of Justice

Early Western theories were developed by Ancient Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. Modern notions of justice have their roots in Christian theology, where morality is dictated by God. But how do these different perspectives intertwine to shape our understanding of justice today?

Different Philosophical Perspectives on Justice

John Locke said that justice derives from natural law, while Jean-Jacques Rousseau advocated for social contract theory. In the 19th century, utilitarian philosophers such as John Stuart Mill proposed that justice is served by creating the best outcomes for the greatest number of people.

The Nature of Justice

According to Plato, justice represents balance and harmony, a right relationship between conflicting aspects within an individual or community. He defines justice as contributing to society according to unique abilities and receiving what is proportionate to one’s contribution. An early meditation on the divine command theory can be found in Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro.

The Divine Command Theory

The Euthyphro dilemma asks whether moral goodness is derived from being commanded by gods or if it is morally good because it is commanded. A response popularized by Immanuel Kant and C.S. Lewis suggests that an objective morality implies the existence of God.

Modern Frameworks of Justice

Modern frameworks include concepts such as distributive justice, egalitarianism, retributive justice, and restorative justice. Distributive justice considers what is fair based on distribution, while egalitarians suggest that justice can only exist within equality. Theories of retributive justice focus on punishing wrongdoers, whereas restorative justice focuses on the needs of victims and offenders.

Justice as Balance

In The Republic, Plato argues that justice is the interest of the strong, imposed on people by powerful rulers. Advocates of social contract theory suggest that justice is derived from mutual agreement, while utilitarian thinkers like John Stuart Mill propose that justice is subordinate to consequentialism, focusing on what has the best consequences for overall welfare.

The Importance of Justice

According to most contemporary theories of justice, justice is overwhelmingly important. John Rawls claims that ‘Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought.’ In classical approaches, evident from Plato through to Rawls, the concept of ‘justice’ is always construed in logical or ‘etymological’ opposition to the concept of injustice.

Equivalence of Justice and Fairness

The equivalence of justice and fairness has been historically and culturally established. John Rawls used a social contract argument to show that justice, and especially distributive justice, is a form of fairness: an impartial distribution of goods. He asks us to imagine ourselves behind a veil of ignorance that denies us all knowledge of our personalities, social statuses, moral characters, wealth, talents, and life plans, and then asks what theory of justice we would choose to govern our society when the veil is lifted.

Distributive Justice

Theories of distributive justice may assert that everyone should get what they deserve. Theories vary on the meaning of what is ‘deserved.’ Main distinction is between theories that say the basis of just deserts ought to be held equally by everyone, and therefore derive egalitarian accounts of distributive justice – and theories that say the basis of just deserts is unequally distributed on the basis of, for instance, hard work, and therefore derive accounts of distributive justice by which some should have more than others.

Justice as a Basic Need

Being treated fairly satisfies a basic need. Research conducted in 2003 at Emory University involving capuchin monkeys demonstrated that other cooperative animals also possess such a sense and that ‘inequity aversion may not be uniquely human.’

Theories of Justice

Instrumental theories of justice look at the consequences of punishment for wrongdoing, including utilitarian, retributive, and restorative theories. According to the utilitarian, justice is the maximization of the total or average welfare across all relevant individuals.

Retributive Justice

Retributive justice argues that consequentialism is wrong, as it believes that punishment should be proportional to the crime and applied equally to all guilty individuals. However, it is sometimes said that retributivism is merely revenge in disguise. However, there are differences between retribution and revenge: the former is impartial and has a scale of appropriateness, whereas the latter is personal and potentially unlimited in scale.

Restorative Justice

Restorative justice attempts to repair the harm that was done to victims by encouraging active participation from victims and offenders. It fosters dialogue between victim and offender, showing high rates of victim satisfaction and offender accountability.

Theories of Distributive Justice

Distributive justice theorists generally do not address who has the right to enforce a particular favored distribution. Property rights theorists argue that there is no ‘favored distribution’ and that distribution should be based on lawful interactions or transactions.

Justice and Institutions

Theories of distributive justice need to answer three questions: What goods are to be distributed? Who should receive these goods? What is the proper distribution? Property rights theorists also take a consequentialist view, arguing that respecting property rights maximizes overall wealth by maximizing Pareto efficiency. The world will have generated the greatest total benefit from limited resources without unlawfully taking anything away from anyone.

Modern Philosophical Perspectives on Justice

Some modern philosophers argue that Utilitarian and Retributive theories are not mutually exclusive. Andrew von Hirsch suggested that we have a moral obligation to punish greater crimes more than lesser ones, as long as this constraint is adhered to, utilitarian ideals would play a secondary role.

Distributive Justice Questions

Theories of distributive justice need to answer three questions: What goods are to be distributed? Who should receive these goods? What is the proper distribution?

Justice in Practice

Institutional justice raises questions about legitimacy, procedure, codification, and interpretation. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16 emphasizes the need for strong institutions to uphold justice.

Justice is an ideal that the world often fails to live up to, sometimes due to opposition to it despite understanding its importance. The journey towards justice is ongoing, and each step we take brings us closer to a fairer society.