Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Types Of Justice
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Types Of Justice

12,634
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
12,634
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
137
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Article on “Justice, Distributive,” in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy
  • Strict Egalitarianism Carens, Joseph, Equality, Moral Incentives and the Market (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1981) Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice (Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971) Nielsen, Kai, `Radical Egalitarian Justice: Justice as Equality' Social Theory and Practice, 1979, 209-226
  • Resource-Based Principles Arneson, Richard, `Liberalism, Distributive Subjectivism, and Equal Opportunity for Welfare' Philosophy and Public Affairs 19, 1990, 158-194 Daniels, Norman, `Equality of What: Welfare, Resources, or Capabilities?' Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 1990 Dworkin, Ronald, `What is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Resources', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10, 1981, 185-246 Dworkin, Ronald, `What is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Welfare', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10, 1981, 283-345 Kronman, Anthony T., `Talent Pooling' in J. Roland Pennock and John W.Chapman (eds.), Human Rights: Nomos 23, (New York: New York University Press, 1981), 58-79
  • Welfare-Based Principles Elster, Jon, and John E. Roemer (eds.), Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-Being, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991) Glover, Jonathan (ed.), Utilitarianism and Its Critics, (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1990) Goodin, Robert E., Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995) Hardin, Russell, Morality within the Limits of Reason (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1988) Rescher, Nicholas, Distributive Justice: A Constructive Critique of the Utilitarian Theory of Distribution (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1966)
  • SLIDESHARE Desert-Based Principles Feinberg, Joel, `Justice and Personal Desert', Doing and Deserving (Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1970), 55-94. Lamont, Julian, `Problems For Effort-Based Distribution Principles', Journal of Applied Philosophy, 12, 1995, 215-229 Lamont, Julian, `The Concept of Desert in Distributive Justice', The Philosophical Quarterly, 44, 1994, 45-64 Mill, John Stuart, Principles of Political Economy Miller, David, Market, State, and Community (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989) Miller, David, Social Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976) Riley, Jonathan, `Justice Under Capitalism', Markets and Justice , ed. John W. Chapman (New York: New York University Press, 1989), 122-162 Sadurski, Wojciech, Giving Desert Its Due (Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel, 1985) Sher, George, Desert (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987) Zaitchik, Alan, `On Deserving to Deserve', Philosophy and Public Affairs 6, 1977:370-388
  • Transcript

    • 1. Types of Justice
      • Distributive Justice
        • Benefits and burdens
      • Retributive Justice
        • Criminal justice
    • 2. Distributive Justice
      • The central question of distributive justice is the question of how the benefits and burdens of our lives are to be distributed.
        • Justice involves giving each person his or her due.
        • Equals are to be treated equally.
    • 3. Goods Subject to Distribution
      • What is to be distributed?
        • Income (income tax)
        • Wealth (inheritance tax)
        • Opportunities (equal opportunities)
    • 4. Subjects of Distribution
      • To whom are good to be distributed?
        • Individual persons
        • Groups of persons
        • Classes
    • 5. Apply to Social Policy
      • Tax Policy
        • Progressive tax system
        • Flat tax system
        • Should the wealthy be taxed at a higher rate
    • 6. Apply to Social Policy
      • Health Care
        • Should everyone have health care?
        • Should wealthy people have access to health care that middle or poorer people do not have?
    • 7. Bases for Distribution
      • On what basis should goods be distributed?
        • Equality ( Amartya Sen )
        • Merit ( Hillel Steiner )
        • Free market transactions ( Nozick )
        • Many standards
        • Maximizing individual needs or desires
        • Ability to make best use of the goods
    • 8. Strict Egalitarianism
      • Basic principle: every person should have the same level of material goods and services
      • Criticisms
        • Unduly restricts individual freedom
        • May conflict with what people deserve
    • 9. John Rawls
      • Rawls’s A Theory of Justice (1971) has set the stage for contemporary discussions of justice.
      • Justice as Fairness
    • 10. A Theory of Justice
      • Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.
      • Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both:
          • to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings principle, and
          • attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
      • #1 must be satisfied prior to 2, and 2b prior to 2a
    • 11. The Difference Principle
      • If a system of strict equality maximizes the absolute position of the least advantaged in society, then the Difference Principle advocates strict equality.
      • If it is possible to raise the position of the least advantaged further by inequality of income and wealth, then the Difference Principle prescribes inequality up to that point where the absolute position of the least advantaged can no longer be raised.
    • 12. Critics of the Difference Principle
      • Strict egalitarians: don’t treat anyone differently
      • Utilitarians: doesn’t maximize utility
      • Libertarian: infringes on liberty through taxation, etc.
      • Desert-based theorists argue to reward hard work even when it doesn’t help the disadvantaged
      • Does not provide sufficient rewards for ambition
    • 13. Resource-Based Approaches: Ronald Dworkin
      • People should be made to accept the consequences of their choices
        • people who choose to work hard to earn more income should not be required to subsidize those choosing more leisure and hence less income
      • People should not to suffer consequences of circumstances over which they have no control
        • people born with handicaps, ill-health, or low levels of natural endowments have not brought these circumstances upon themselves
    • 14. Welfare-Based Approaches
      • Seeks to maximize well-being of society as a whole
      • Utilitarian in inspiration: it seeks to maximize welfare for everyone.
    • 15. Desert-Based Approaches
      • People should be rewarded for their:
        • Actual contribution
        • Effort
      • Seeks to raise the overall standard of living by rewarding effort and achievement
      • May be applied only to working adults
    • 16. Conclusion
      • Distributive justice attempts to answer the question of how goods and opportunities in society can be distributed fairly.