{"id":142,"date":"2025-09-18T10:29:03","date_gmt":"2025-09-18T04:59:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/?p=142"},"modified":"2025-09-19T20:16:02","modified_gmt":"2025-09-19T14:46:02","slug":"justice-crisp-revision-notes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/justice-crisp-revision-notes\/","title":{"rendered":"Justice : Revision Notes"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/h3>\n

1. Justice as Ideal & Absolute Truth<\/h4>\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Angle<\/strong><\/th>\nKey Takeaways<\/strong><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Static vs Dynamic<\/strong><\/td>\nStatic grasp = comprehension of an ideal absolute truth.
\nDynamic grasp = that truth evolving with rationality and social consciousness.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Context-dependence<\/strong><\/td>\nWhat once looked \u201cjust\u201d (slavery, caste, women\u2019s subjugation) later turns unjust as moral horizons widen.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Etymology<\/strong><\/td>\n\u201cJangere\u201d (Latin) \u2192 to bind; root of \u201cjus\u201d. Justice binds society into fair relations.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Binding idea<\/strong><\/td>\nDistributes rights, duties, rewards, punishments on morally defensible grounds.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u00a02. Classical Principles of Justice<\/h4>\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Source<\/th>\nCore Rule<\/th>\nScholar \/ Era<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Roman Emperor Justinian<\/td>\nAlterum non laedere<\/em> \u2013 \u201cDo not harm others.\u201d
\nSuum cuique tribuere<\/em> \u2013 \u201cGive each his due.\u201d<\/td>\n		Late Roman<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Plato<\/td>\nProper stationing + non-interference.<\/td>\nRepublic<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Aristotle<\/td>\nGeneral Justice (overall goodness) vs Particular Justice: rectificatory (correct wrongs) and distributive (share honours, resources).<\/td>\nNicomachean Ethics<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u00a03. Justice as a Balancing Yard-stick<\/h3>\n
    \n
  • \n

    Resolves clashes\u2014most famously liberty \u2194 equality.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  • \n

    Your stance pivots on which value you badge as ultimate.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    \n
    \n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Conception<\/th>\nUltimate Value<\/th>\nPolitical Stream<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Procedural<\/td>\nLiberty<\/td>\nLiberalism \u2192 emphasises formal equality & opportunity.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Substantive<\/td>\nEquality<\/td>\nSocialism \u2192 seeks equality of outcomes.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    \u00a04. Liberalism \u2192 Utilitarianism \u2192 Rawls<\/h4>\n
      \n
    1. \n

      Classic Liberalism worships liberty.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    2. \n

      Utilitarianism shifts to utility\u2014\u201cgreatest happiness of the greatest number.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        \n
      • Flaw: legitimises majoritarianism; minorities become means.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
          \n
        1. \n

          Rawls (a Liberal Egalitarian) grafts Kantian ethics\u2014no person is a mere means.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            \n
          • Rawls\u2019s maxim: \u201cEach person has an inviolability\u2026 the welfare of all cannot override the freedom of some.\u201d<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
            \n

            5. Rawls in Focus<\/h4>\n
              \n
            • \n

              Signature works<\/strong>: Justice as Fairness<\/em> (1958), A Theory of Justice<\/em> (1971), Political Liberalism<\/em> (1993), The Laws of Peoples<\/em> (1998).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

            • \n

              Society\u2019s nature<\/strong>: Cooperative yet conflictual; justice is its first virtue (truth is for thought).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

            • \n

              Social contract redux<\/strong>: Original Position behind a \u201cveil of ignorance\u201d \u2192 impartial choice of principles.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

            • \n

              Moral powers<\/strong>:<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. \n

                Sense of Justice (reasonableness, reciprocity).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

              2. \n

                Conception of the Good (life-plans).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n

              3. \n

                Primary goods<\/strong>: Rights, liberties, income, wealth\u2014tools every life-plan needs.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                \n
                Maximin Rule & the Two Principles<\/h5>\n
                  \n
                • \n

                  Maximin logic<\/strong>: \u201cMaximise the minimum.\u201d Choose rules that secure the best worst-case scenario.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                • \n

                  Principle 1 \u2013 Liberty<\/strong>: Each person enjoys the most extensive equal basic liberty compatible with the same liberty for others.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                • \n

                  Principle 2 \u2013 Difference + Fair Equality of Opportunity<\/strong>: Inequalities are only just if they benefit the least advantaged and attach to positions open to all under fair opportunity.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                • \n

                  Lexical priority<\/strong>: Liberty first; only then weigh Principle 2.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                  \n
                  \u00a0Reflective Equilibrium<\/h5>\n
                    \n
                  • \n

                    Iterative balancing between held judgments and chosen principles.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                  • \n

                    Narrow equilibrium: align your set of beliefs with one principle-set.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                  • \n

                    Wide equilibrium: re-adjust after scanning all moral considerations.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                  • \n

                    End-goal: a coherent web you can defend under cross-examination\u2014precisely what evaluators annotate in the margin.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                    \n

                    6. Communitarian Critique of Rawls \u2013 Core Points<\/h4>\n

                    Michael Sandel ( Liberalism and the Limits of Justice<\/em>, 1982)<\/strong><\/p>\n

                    Concept of Self<\/strong><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    • Rawls: self prior to its ends (freely chooses goals).<\/li>\n
                    • Sandel: humans are \u201cembedded selves\u201d; identities and purposes are given by community, not chosen.<\/li>\n
                    • Original position is infeasible\u2014agents cannot step outside communal attachments.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                      Individual \u2194 Community<\/strong><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      • Rawls over-states autonomy, under-states communal bonds.<\/li>\n
                      • Disinterested contractors behind the veil later feel duty to aid disadvantaged; Sandel says genuine concern arises from shared life.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                        Role of the State<\/strong><\/p>\n

                        Against Rawlsian neutrality, state should advance community\u2019s vision of the good.<\/p>\n

                        In a united community, abstract rights-talk becomes redundant.<\/p>\n

                        Neutral-State Skepticism (Communitarian View)<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        • \n

                          True neutrality is an illusion; every state expresses a cultural ethos.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                        • \n

                          Alasdair MacIntyre<\/strong>: moral norms vary by tradition.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                        • \n

                          Michael Walzer (Spheres of Justice<\/em>, 1983)<\/strong>: justice is relativistic & particularistic; goods carry social meanings of distinct communities.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                          \n

                          7. Rawls\u2019s Reply \u2013 Political Liberalism<\/em> (1993)<\/strong><\/h4>\n
                            \n
                          • \n

                            Political conception is free-standing yet drawn from democratic public culture.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                          • \n

                            Key Devices<\/strong>:<\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. \n

                              Overlapping Consensus.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                            2. \n

                              Reasonable Pluralism.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                            3. \n

                              Burden of Judgment.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                              \n

                              \u00a08. Rawls & Global Justice<\/h4>\n
                                \n
                              • \n

                                Charles Beitz (1979), Thomas Pogge (1989, 2002)<\/strong> \u2192 extend Difference Principle worldwide.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                              • \n

                                Rawls: no global redistribution; instead, rules for \u201cdecent peoples\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                              • \n

                                Eight duties<\/strong>: mutual independence, keep treaties, equitable deals, non-intervention, self-defence only, honour human rights, war-conduct code, aid burdened societies.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                \n

                                9. Robert Nozick \u2013 Entitlement Theory (Anarchy, State and Utopia<\/em>)<\/h4>\n
                                  \n
                                1. \n

                                  Justice in Acquisition<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                2. \n

                                  Justice in Transfer<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                3. \n

                                  Rectification<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    \n
                                  • \n

                                    Motto: \u201cFrom everyone as they choose, to everyone as they are chosen.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                  • \n

                                    Rejects patterned redistribution; accepts large inequalities if produced by just steps.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                  • \n

                                    State = minimal \u201cnight-watchman\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                    \n

                                    10. Ronald Dworkin \u2013 Equality of Resources<\/h4>\n
                                      \n
                                    • \n

                                      Equality = sovereign virtue; right to equal concern and respect.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                    • \n

                                      Rejects Equality of Welfare; defends Equality of Resources:<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                    • Auction thought-experiment + envy test \u2192 distribution envy-free.<\/li>\n
                                    • \n

                                      Distinguishes brute luck vs option luck.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                      \n

                                      11. Amartya Sen \u2013 Capability Approach<\/h4>\n
                                        \n
                                      • \n

                                        Justice = expanding capabilities (real freedoms), not only primary goods or welfare.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                      • \n

                                        Functionings = valued doings\/beings; development = capability expansion.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                      • \n

                                        Advocates comparative assessment, public reasoning, removal of clear injustices.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                      • \n

                                        Pratap Bhanu Mehta<\/strong>: calls Sen \u201canti-utopian yet utopian.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                        \n
                                        \n\n\n\n\n\n
                                        Metric of Justice<\/th>\nRawls<\/th>\nDworkin<\/th>\nSen<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
                                        Focus<\/td>\nPrimary goods<\/td>\nResources<\/td>\nCapabilities<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
                                        \n

                                        12. Feminist Conception of Justice<\/h4>\n
                                          \n
                                        • \n

                                          Julius Stone<\/strong>: law\/justice are social constructs, context-bound.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                        • \n

                                          Susan Moller Okin<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                          Household & family are blind spots; root of unfairness.<\/p>\n

                                          Veil of ignorance omits sex \u2192 gender bias persists.<\/p>\n

                                          Critique of Rawls\u2019s male-generic language.<\/p>\n

                                          Theory: reconstruct roles via women\u2019s full participation.<\/p>\n

                                          \n

                                          13. Debate on Rawls\u2019s Democratic Equality<\/h4>\n

                                          Strengths<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                            \n
                                          • \n

                                            Combines equal basic liberties, fair equality of opportunity, and difference principle.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                            Critiques<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              \n
                                            • \n

                                              Robert Nozick<\/strong>: redistributive tax = forced labour.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                            • \n

                                              G.A. Cohen<\/strong>: difference principle lets talented demand incentives.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                            • \n

                                              Amartya Sen<\/strong>: primary goods ignore conversion differences.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                            • \n

                                              Susan Okin<\/strong>: household labour and gender hierarchy remain unseen.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                            • \n

                                              Rawls revises \u2192 property-owning democracy to curb inequality.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                              \n

                                              14. How Rawls Widens Liberal Justice<\/h4>\n
                                                \n
                                              • \n

                                                Original position forces protection of least advantaged while retaining liberty.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                              • \n

                                                Shifts liberalism from formal rights to justice as fairness.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                              • \n

                                                Introduces public reason, progressive tax, dispersed capital, fair value of liberty.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                              • \n

                                                Sparked modern normative revival (Kymlicka, Sen, Forrester<\/strong>).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                \n

                                                \u00a015. Ambedkar\u2019s Egalitarian Justice vs Rawls\u2019s Procedural Justice<\/h4>\n
                                                  \n
                                                • \n

                                                  Ambedkar<\/strong>: abolition of caste; state-led redistribution; outcome-centred substantive justice.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                                                • \n

                                                  Rawls<\/strong>: veil of ignorance + two principles; justice as whatever emerges from procedure.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                  \n

                                                  Scholar Index<\/h3>\n

                                                  Bhimrao Ambedkar \u00b7 Charles R. Beitz \u00b7 Gerald Allan Cohen \u00b7 Ronald Dworkin \u00b7 Katrina Forrester \u00b7 Emperor Justinian I \u00b7 Immanuel Kant \u00b7 Will Kymlicka \u00b7 Alasdair MacIntyre \u00b7 Pratap Bhanu Mehta \u00b7 Robert Nozick \u00b7 Susan Okin \u00b7 Thomas Pogge \u00b7 Michael Sandel \u00b7 Amartya Sen \u00b7 Julius Stone \u00b7 Charles Taylor \u00b7 Michael Walzer<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                                  1. Justice as Ideal & Absolute Truth Angle Key Takeaways Static vs Dynamic Static grasp = comprehension of an ideal absolute truth. Dynamic grasp = that truth evolving with rationality and social consciousness. Context-dependence What once looked \u201cjust\u201d (slavery, caste, women\u2019s subjugation) later turns unjust as moral horizons widen. Etymology \u201cJangere\u201d (Latin) \u2192 to bind; […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":143,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,4],"tags":[14,12,16,15,13],"class_list":["post-142","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-paper-1-section-a","category-political-theory","tag-dworkin","tag-justice","tag-nozick","tag-psir","tag-rawls"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Justice-pic.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=142"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":170,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142\/revisions\/170"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/143"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}