Theories of Justice

PUBLISHED September, 2024

Theories of Justice [AT-A-GLANCE]

Justice = Contextual

Pluralism

There is NO ONE proper way to distribute benefits and burdens

Principles of Justice:

(i) We should apply whatever basic principle of distribution fits the situation, or can be justified on independent grounds

(ii) Distribute according to need

(iii) Only on grounds of merit, or social utility

(iv) Redistribute according to ability to contribute

(v) Or weigh one against another, perhaps reaching some kind of compromise situation

Economics: Distributive Justice

Role of Rights / Justified Institutions: NO SINGLE VIEW

Problems:
-If there is no one way of distributing benefits and burdens, how do we decide which one to use?
-If a particular theory can be justified on independent grounds, then why be pluralist at all? Why not just adopt that theory of justice?

Justice = Maximized Happiness

Utilitarianism

Adherents: John Stuart Mill

Principles of Justice:

(i) Happiness = flourishing, human good, basic needs [mental/physical well-being]

(ii) Needed for happiness =
-Political/ economic freedom
-Economic prosperity

Economics: Distributive Justice

Role of Rights: Bill of Rights
Rights can be violated only if benefits for the many outweigh the costs to the few

Justified Institutions:
-Democracy
-Free-market Capitalism [unregulated]

Problems: Unregulated politics and economics typically maximize happiness only for a few over the many

Justice = Fairness

Rawlsianism

Adherents: John Rawls

Principles of Justice:

(i) Fairness =
-Original Position [OP]
-Veil of Ignorance [VOI]

(i) Deontology =
-Equal Liberty - that each member of the society should have as much liberty as possible without infringing on the liberty of others
-Difference & Reciprocity – rules that would make a society in which the least well off are in the best possible position. Deviations from equality of distribution of benefits and burdens are justified ONLY if it advantages the least well off

(iii) Balanced with Reflective Equilibrium

Economics: Distributive Justice

Role of Rights: Utilizes social contract theory – some rights exchanged for fairness [Hobbes, Locke]

Justified Institutions:
-Socialism and Welfare - egalitarian redistribution of wealth to rectify inequalities

Problems:
-Such drastic distribution violates people’s rights to their entitlements [property]
-Also assumes people are rational and reasonable in making decisions about fairness; is the OP or VOI even possible?

Justice = Liberty + Entitlement

Libertarianism

Adherents: Robert Nozick & John Locke

Principles of Justice:

(i) Entitlement =
-Just Acquisition
-Just Transfer
-Rectifying Injustice

(ii) Rejected Rawls’ Second Principle of Difference and Reciprocity [Kant – treat people as ends not means]

(iii) Self-ownership

Economics: Entitlement Justice

Role of Rights: Utilizes social contract theory – few rights consensually exchanged for protection of negative rights; Distributive Justice violates positive rights

Justified Institutions:
Nozick: Anarchy and Small Business
Locke: Democracy and Free-market Capitalism

Problems: 

Criticisms of Distribution [Wilt Chamberlain ex.]
-Fairness costs freedom
-Distribution assumes that things come into the world without being attached to those who brought them – false

Criticisms of Entitlement
-Assumes all positive rights worth protecting and all negative rights worth sacrificing

Other Theories of Economic Justice

-Marxism: From each according to the ability, to each according to their need

-Welfarism: In varying degrees, significant redistribution of goods and services funded by high levels of taxation

-Slave Societies and Serfdom: Where a significant proportion of the population is unfree in the sense that someone else either owns them, or owns the products of their labor

-Militarism: Military goals are held to be primary; benefits and burdens are distributed so as to bring about the military goals

FREE [Open Access] Resources