Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Walzer argues in favour of an idea he calls "complex equality", and against the view that goods with different meaning and content can be lumped together into the larger category of primary goods, as is advocated by John Rawls, in his A Theory of Justice (1971). According to Walzer, each sphere has its own internal logic and should be governed ...
The theory posits that inequalities in several spheres of society should not invade one another. [3] Walzer's definition of complex equality is: "In formal terms, complex equality means that no citizen's standing in one sphere or with regard to one social good can be undercut by his standing in some other sphere, with regard to some other good."
In its broadest sense, justice is the idea that individuals should be treated fairly. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the most plausible candidate for a core definition comes from the Institutes of Justinian, a codification of Roman Law from the sixth century AD, where justice is defined as "the constant and perpetual will to render to each his due".
Definitions of social equity can vary, but all focus on the ideals of justice and fairness. Equity should involve the role of public administrators, who are responsible for ensuring that social services are delivered equitably. This implies taking into account historical and current inequalities among groups.
Social philosophy is the study and interpretation of society and social institutions in terms of ethical values rather than empirical relations. [1] Social philosophers emphasize understanding the social contexts for political, legal, moral and cultural questions, and the development of novel theoretical frameworks, from social ontology to care ethics to cosmopolitan theories of democracy ...
So, different justices apply to the domestic and international cases. Even if justice requires egalitarianism within states, it does not do so between them. And a system of cooperating but independent states is the just global institutional arrangement. Rawls describes this ideal as a 'realistic utopia'. [32]
In social psychology, distributive justice is defined as perceived fairness of how rewards and costs are shared by (distributed across) group members. [2] For example, when some workers work more hours but receive the same pay, group members may feel that distributive justice has not occurred.
In Principles of Social Justice Miller proposes a pluralist account of social justice, arguing that there can be no single measure of justice.This puts him in opposition to theorists such as Robert Nozick or John Rawls, who both argue for some sort of 'unifying theory' in understandings of justice.