Core Theories of Justice and Ethical Application
Section 1: The Three Approaches to Justice
Justice concerns the distribution of income, wealth, rights, duties, powers, opportunities, offices, and honors.
- Welfare: Utilitarianism
- Freedom: Libertarianism, Kant, Rawls
- Virtue: Aristotle, MacIntyre, Communitarianism
Section 2: Quick Theory Identification (MCQ Clues)
Utilitarianism
- Focuses on consequences.
- Maximizes total welfare or happiness.
- Motto: “Greatest good for the greatest number.”
- Uses cost-benefit analysis; emphasizes efficiency and overall outcomes.
Libertarianism
- Emphasizes free markets and voluntary consent.
- Stresses property rights, opposes excessive taxation and regulation.
- Values self-ownership and autonomy of market participants.
Kantian Ethics
- Focuses on duty, autonomy, and dignity.
- Motive matters more than consequences.
- Requires universal moral laws; never treat people as “mere means.”
Rawlsian Justice
- Prioritizes fairness and equality.
- Uses the “veil of ignorance” and the “original position.”
- Difference Principle: Inequalities are permissible only if they benefit the least advantaged.
- Addresses moral arbitrariness (luck should not determine life chances).
Virtue Theory (Aristotle)
- Determines the telos (purpose) of practices and institutions.
- Justice means giving people what they deserve based on purpose and virtue.
- Aims for human flourishing (eudaimonia) and character development.
Communitarianism (MacIntyre, Sandel)
- Rejects moral individualism.
- Emphasizes obligations derived from community and history.
- Values narrative identity and obligations of solidarity (unchosen duties).
Section 3: Utilitarianism (Bentham & Mill)
Core Ideas
- The right action produces the best overall consequences.
- Maximizes happiness and minimizes pain.
- Everyone’s welfare counts equally.
Sandel’s Critiques
- Violates individual rights (sacrificing the few for the many).
- The common currency problem (cannot assign value to dignity, love, or honor).
- Happiness is not the complete measure of morality.
Mill’s Modifications
- Distinguishes between “higher” and “lower” pleasures.
- Advocates for rule utilitarianism to promote long-term welfare.
Section 4: Libertarianism (Nozick)
Core Ideas
- Self-ownership: You own your labor and income.
- Taxation is equivalent to forced labor.
- Advocates for a minimal state, rejecting paternalism, morals legislation, and redistribution.
Sandel’s Critiques
- Natural talents are morally arbitrary.
- Social structures significantly influence success.
- Many “consensual” transactions are not truly free.
- Can lead to morally troubling markets (e.g., organs, surrogacy).
Section 5: Kantian Ethics
Core Ideas
- Morality requires acting from duty, not desire.
- Autonomy is self-governance through reason.
Categorical Imperative
- Universal Law: Act only on maxims that could be universalized.
- Humanity: Treat people as ends, never merely as means.
Examples
- Murderer at the door: Lying is always wrong.
- Shopkeeper case: Performing the right act for the wrong motive has no moral worth.
Section 6: Rawls – Justice as Fairness
Veil of Ignorance
- Requires choosing principles without knowing one’s race, class, gender, or talents.
- Ensures impartiality and fairness in principle selection.
Two Principles of Justice
- Equal basic liberties for all citizens.
- Difference Principle: Inequalities must benefit the least advantaged.
Key Ideas
- Moral arbitrariness: We do not deserve our natural talents or social position.
- Rejects the concept of “moral desert.”
- Justice equals fairness, not the rewarding of virtue.
Affirmative Action (Dworkin)
- Admissions should serve the institution’s mission.
- It should not be viewed as a reward for personal merit alone.
Section 7: Aristotle – Virtue & Teleology
Core Ideas
- To determine what is just, one must first determine the purpose (telos) of the practice.
- Justice involves giving people what they deserve based on virtue relative to that purpose.
- Human flourishing (eudaimonia) requires rational activity within a community.
- Politics aims to cultivate virtue in its citizens.
Section 8: Communitarianism & Obligations of Solidarity
Key Ideas
- We inherit unchosen obligations from our family, nation, and community.
- Moral individualism is considered false.
- Quote: “I can only answer what I ought to do if I know the story I am part of.”
Three Kinds of Obligations
- Natural duties (universal).
- Voluntary obligations (contracts).
- Solidarity obligations (unchosen, particular duties).
Section 9: All Case Studies (Theories & Claims)
Case 1: Barings Bank Collapse
- Rawlsian Side (Pro-Regulation): Collapse resulted from systemic failure and lack of oversight. Fair institutions require transparency and accountability to protect stakeholders.
- Virtue Ethics Side (Blame Capitalism): The trading environment cultivates vices like greed and deception. The collapse was predictable due to a morally flawed culture.
Case 2: Big Tech Monopolies (Google, Amazon, Facebook)
- Libertarian Side (Pro-Tech): Outcomes are determined by market choices and consent; users freely choose platforms. Breaking up companies punishes innovation, and network effects are natural and efficient.
- Kantian Side (Anti-Tech): Manipulating search results violates user autonomy, treating users as mere means. Monopolies limit real consent and distort competition through deception.
Case 3: NFL Head Injuries
- Utilitarian Side (Pro-NFL): Entertainment value, jobs, and revenue create a large net benefit. Players voluntarily accept risks, and profit maximization increases overall welfare.
- Kantian Side (Anti-NFL): Players’ bodies are used as tools for profit, violating the principle of treating people as ends. Consent is compromised by scientific uncertainty and economic pressure, violating player dignity and autonomy.
Case 4: Pharmaceutical Pricing
- Virtue Ethics / Pro-Regulation: Pricing life-saving drugs is a moral issue. Greed is a vice, necessitating regulation to protect public welfare. Essential goods should reflect human dignity, not pure profit.
- Libertarian / Anti-Regulation: Pharmaceutical companies own their patents and may set prices freely. High prices incentivize innovation. Government interference violates property rights and market freedom.
Case 5: Welfare Reform (1996)
- Utilitarian Side (Pro-Reform): Reducing welfare encourages work, economic efficiency, and independence. Lower taxes increase general welfare, and short-term hardship is offset by long-term gains.
- Rawlsian Side (Anti-Reform): The reform harms the least advantaged, making it unjust. It increases poverty among vulnerable groups (e.g., single mothers, children). Behind the veil, no one would accept these risks, violating fairness and the Difference Principle.
Section 10: Extremely Short Summary
Theories
- Utilitarianism: Maximize welfare; consequences rule.
- Libertarianism: Consent, property rights, minimal state.
- Kant: Duty, autonomy, dignity; never treat as means.
- Rawls: Fairness; veil of ignorance; protects the least advantaged.
- Aristotle: Virtue; purpose (telos); flourishing.
- Communitarianism: Obligations of solidarity; narrative identity.
Case Applications
- Barings: Rawls (regulation needed) vs. Virtue (cultural corruption).
- Big Tech: Libertarian (leave alone) vs. Kant (break up due to means usage).
- NFL: Utilitarian (profit/entertainment) vs. Kant (players used as means).
- Pharma: Virtue (regulate greed) vs. Libertarian (market decides pricing).
- Welfare: Utilitarian (efficiency) vs. Rawls (harm to least advantaged).