Justice

“This dilemma points to one of the great questions of political philosophy: Does a just society seek to promote the virtue of its citizens? Or should law be neutral toward competing conceptions of virtue, so that citizens can be free to choose for themselves the best way to live?”

Sandel raises these questions for the first time in discussing how people react to price gouging during emergencies. When he moves into discussing particular theories of justice in detail, he begins with theories that are neutral toward competing conceptions of virtue, including libertarianism and egalitarianism. Later in the book, he moves into theories that are not neutral toward promoting virtue, including Aristotle’s. Ultimately, Sandel presents his own view as one in which virtues are integrated into our debates over political issues.

“To ask whether a society is just is to ask how it distributes the things we prize–income and wealth, duties and rights, powers and opportunities, offices and honors. A just society distributes these goods in the right way; it gives each person his or her due. The hard questions begin when we ask what people are due, and why.”

Sandel explores the question of what people are due, and why, by presenting three main theories of justice and how they differ in their answers. Through hypotheticals and real-life examples, he explores what a just society consists of for a utilitarian, libertarian, Kantian, egalitarian, Aristotelian, communitarian, and others who advocate for virtue to be integrated into politics. The debates that arise from these competing views support Sandel’s assertion that these are “hard questions” for any society to answer. 

“Some of our debates reflect disagreement about what it means to maximize welfare or respect freedom or cultivate virtue. Others involve disagreement about what to do when these ideals conflict. Political philosophy cannot resolve these disagreements once and for all. But it can give shape to the arguments we have, and bring moral clarity to the alternatives we confront as democratic citizens.”

Throughout the book, Sandel presents questions without providing easy answers. Even when he presents his own views in greater detail in the last two chapters of the book, he still leaves questions open about how his theory would be implemented.