ASK A QUESTION

RECENT RESPONSES

CONCEPT CLOUD


CATEGORIES

  • Panelist Login

Justice

SEE ANOTHER QUESTION
in Justice

This is a follow-up to question 1522 [www.askphilosophers/question/1522). In my language, there is a single word for "justice" and "fairness" ("justiça"). If someone in an English-speaking movie says "That ain't fair!", the translation will probably use our word for "just".

So, it is really very difficult for me to understand Rawls's claim that justice is fairness. How could justiça not be justiça?

December 31, 2006

Response from Oliver Leaman on January 5, 2007
I don't see the difficulty. Rawls tried to show how his conception of justice really does establish the parameters of justice, i.e. fairness. When we wonder whether some distribution is just we consider whether it is fair, and if it is, then it is just. Of course, we tend to disagree on what counts as just, but whatever it is, it has to be fair also.

Print PRINT Send2friends E-MAIL
E-MAIL THIS ENTRY

Recipient's e-address: required
(separate multiple e-addresses with commas)
Your name: required
Your e-address: required

Track TRACK

TRACK THIS ENTRY

If you provide your e-mail address, you will be automatically notified whenever this question receives a response. Your e-mail address will not be used for any other purpose, and it will not be given or sold to anyone.

E-mail:

SHARE
SHARE THIS ENTRY

del.icio.us
Digg! Digg
Facebook
Twitter
reddit
StumbleUpon