1. Theories of justice

2. Some Theories of Justice
Comprehensive/
Principle Based
Contextual/
Casuistical
Utilitarianism Michael Walzer
John Rawls Communitarians
Robert Nozick

3. Types of Justice
• Procedural justice
– Level playing field
– Equality before the law
– Due process
• Distributive justice
– Equal opportunity
– Desert
– Outcome based versions (patterned principles)
– Historical theories
– Rights theories
• Compensatory justice
• Retributive justice
• Transitional justice

4. Rawls’s Social Contract
• Connects moral choice (consent) and rational
choice: the original position and the veil of
ignorance as a means of preventing the
principles of justice from being infected with
self-interest
• Hypothetical contract that identifies the most
basic principles of justice
• This contract approach could also (and has
been) used to justify utilitarianism.

5. Rawls on the Just State
• Justice as equity
• A just society is a society founded on just principles.
• A just society would be a just society
• Equity implies distributive justice
• There is an equitable distribution of primary social
goods.
o power,
o Opportunities
o freedoms and privileges,
o basics of self-respect (e.g. equal political representation)

6. Rawls’s Principles of Justice
• Everyone should have the same right to the broadest
global system of equal fundamental freedoms
compatible with a similar system of freedoms for all.
• Social and economic inequalities must be organized in
such a way that:
a) they benefit the less favored as much as possible
(principle of difference) and
b) are allocated to posts and positions open to all under
conditions of fair equality chances
• Lexical order of principles (the priority of freedom)
• Utilitarianism, Rawls principles, egalitarianism
• Desert: defined by the principles of justice

7. Rawls on the Just State
• What is a Fair Society?
–Would a fair society would be one that any rational,
self-interested person would want to join?
–Not quite. They will be biased to their own talents.

8. Rawls on the Just State
• The veil of ignorance
– Suppose they choose from behind a veil of
ignorance where they don't know what their
talents are or where they stand in society.
– They would choose a fair society for everyone
because they would have to live with their choice
– So, a just society is one that any rational and self-
interested person behind the veil of ignorance
would like to join.

9. Rawls on the Just State
• Initial position
– How would we choose?
• We choose the basic social conditions that determine
our outlook for life.
• We can only choose once
– We would follow a principle of maximin choice
• choose the setting where your worst outcome is better
than your worst outcome in any other setting
– We would not give up fundamental rights and
freedoms

10. Rawls on the Just State
• Initial position
– Rawls is a social contract theorist
– By forming a social contract, we decide on the
basic structure of the company.
– We do this as rational and interested voters,
behind the veil of ignorance.
– This prime position Rawls calls out The Original
Position

11. Critiques of Social Contract Theories
• Communitarianism: the authority of the State
does not depend on the consent of
individuals; individuals rather depend on the
state for their realization and their identity
(Aristotle, Hegel)
• Feminism: Since women are normally
expected to focus on private (family) matters,
they are excluded from full participation in the
social contract.

12. Minimal State (Entitlement) Theory:
Robert Nozick
• We have the right to use our property as we
see fit. The legitimate power of the state is
limited to preventing damage and protecting
property rights
• Imposing taxes for anything other than
protection (e.g. to enforce a pattern of wealth
redistribution) is unfair because it ignores how
goods are acquired fairly through trade, labor,
gifts, etc. .

13. Nozick’s Entitlement Theory
• Libertarian approach to justice
• Based on a Lockean conception of property

14. 3 Principles
• Principle of transfer: whatever is acquired
with justice can be transferred freely.
• Principle of Fair Initial Acquisition: A
description of how people initially come to
own things that can be transferred according
to principle.
• Injustice rectification principle: how to deal
with shares if they have been acquired or
transferred unfairly.

15. Historical vs. End-Result Principles
• Historical principles: distributive principles
that depend on how a distribution is born.
• Current Time Interval Principles (Bottom Line
Principles): The fairness of a distribution is
determined by how things are distributed,
based on structural principles.
• The theory of rights results in an unstructured
distribution.

16. Ambition vs. Endowment
• Unlike Rawls's theory, Nozick's theory is not
"endowment-sensitive" but "ambition-
sensitive"
• According to Nozick, only the minimalist state
is the only morally justified state
– Execution of contracts
– Protection against force and fraud

17. Intuitive argument for the entitlement
theory
• D1: Rule R1 provides a fair distribution of
goods.
• D2: State resulting from the movement of D1
according to the P principle (s).
• If D1 is a fair distribution and the exchange of
goods that results in D2 is not forced, then D2
is fair.

18. Amartya Sen: “Development as
Freedom”
• What should be distributed are:
1) Elementary functions: "do" and "Beings" having
access to adequate food and shelter that can be
personal freedom, income and wealth.
2) Complex functions: "acts" and "beings" as have
self-respect and be able to participate in political
communities that depend on factors
independent of resource ownership.

19. Martha Nussbaum: “Capabilities
Approach”
• Central human functional capabilities that ought to be
distributed:
1. Life
2. Bodily health
3. Bodily integrity
4. Senses, imagination, and thought
5. Emotions
6. Practical reason
7. Affiliation toward other species and as the basis for self-
respect and dignity
8. Other species
9. Play
10. Control over your political and material environment

20. Sen’s and Nussbaum’s
Capabilities Approaches
• For Sen, a person who cannot perform basic
and complex functions cannot lead a decent
human life; for Nussbaum, a person who lacks
skills cannot lead a decent life.
• Political and economic institutions should
facilitate and / or provide opportunities for
people to exercise functions (Sen) or
capacities (Nussbaum).

21. Scope, Shape, and Currency
of Capabilities Approaches
• Scope: These approaches cover at least all
people.
• Form: Capability approaches are based on
hybrids of equality and sufficiency.
• Money: Capacity-based approaches distribute
opportunities to exercise what is
fundamentally human (core functions or
capacities).