Key Points

Justice concerns our life in society and the principles by which social goods and duties are distributed among its members. It involves giving each person his or her due.

Ancient thinkers like Plato in Greece and Confucius in China grappled with justice. Plato argued in 'The Republic' that justice is about the well-being of all people, not just personal gain.

The philosopher Immanuel Kant linked justice to human dignity. He argued that if all persons have dignity, what is due to them is the opportunity to develop their talents and pursue their goals.

This principle asserts that all individuals, as human beings, deserve equal rights and equal treatment. It requires non-discrimination on grounds of class, caste, race, or gender.

This principle suggests that it is fair to reward people differently in proportion to the scale, quality, skill, and effort of their work. It balances equal treatment by recognizing different contributions.

This principle states that to promote social justice, a society must account for the special needs of its members, such as those with disabilities or lack of access to education. It extends the principle of equality by treating unequals differently.

Social justice is closely related to distributive justice, which concerns the fair distribution of goods, services, and opportunities within a society. It may require redistributing resources to provide a level playing field for all citizens.

John Rawls, a political philosopher, argued that a fair and just society can be defended on rational grounds. He proposed a thought experiment to determine the principles of just distribution.

Rawls's key idea is the 'veil of ignorance'. He asks us to imagine ourselves in a situation where we do not know our future position in society (caste, class, gender, etc.) when deciding its rules.

Rawls argues that under the veil of ignorance, rational individuals would choose rules that benefit the worst-off members of society. This is because anyone could end up in that position, so it is in their self-interest to ensure a basic safety net for all.

A just society should provide all its members with basic minimum conditions for a healthy and secure life. This includes adequate nourishment, housing, clean water, education, and a minimum wage.

A major debate in pursuing social justice is whether to rely on free markets or state intervention. This concerns how best to help the disadvantaged and distribute resources fairly.

Supporters of free markets argue that competition rewards merit and talent, gives consumers more choice, and leads to a just distribution of benefits without state interference. They believe the market is neutral regarding a person's background.

Critics argue that free markets often favor the wealthy and powerful, denying opportunities to the disadvantaged. They believe the state must intervene to ensure basic facilities and a minimum standard of living are available to everyone.

The government's role is to harmonize the different principles of justice: equal treatment, proportionate rewards, and special needs. It must also negotiate disagreements about distribution to promote a just society.