Michael Walzer's 'Spheres of Justice' (1983) critiques John Rawls' universal principles of distributive justice, advocating for distinct, autonomous spheres of justice within every society. He emphasizes that different social goods have varying meanings and values based on their context, and argues against the conversion or exchange among these spheres. The implementation of his pluralistic approach relies on state intervention to maintain the separation of these spheres and may result in unequal distributions within them, yet can achieve a general equality overall.

1. Michael Walzer

2.  ‘Spheres of Justice: A defense of Pluralism
and Equality’- 1983.
 A communitarian account of distributive
Justice.
 Criticized John Rawls’ theory of justice which
suggest one universal set of principles for
distribution of all primary social goods.

3. 1. Distinct spheres of distribution in every society.
2. Independent and autonomous sphere of
distributive justice.
3. Different norms for distributive justice.
4. Different meaning and value of social goods in
particular society.
5. No universal principles of distribution of social
goods.
6. Specific principle for specific sphere of justice.
7. No conversion and exchange of among various
spheres – Principle of ‘Blocked Exchanges’.

4. Family
Love
Age/need
Politics
Post/Office
Leadership
/hard work
Health
Care
Need
Education
Knowledge
Eligibility/
Hard work
Market
Money
Hard work
Spheres of Justice

5. 1. Different principles for different sphere of
distribution of social goods.
2. Conversion or effect of one social good for
other should be blocked.
3. It is the duty of the state to kept separate
the various spheres of social justice.
4. Within a particular sphere there may be
unequal distribution of specific social
goods.
5. But sum total of position in different sphere
may produce a ‘General Equality’.

6. 1. Difficult to implement.
2. Idealistic assumptions.
3. Required state intervention.