Justice
Michael Sandel offers a searching, lyrical exploration of the meaning of justice that considers familiar controversies such as affirmative action, same-sex marriage, physician-assisted suicide, abortion, national service, patriotism and dissent, and the moral limits of markets in fresh and illuminating ways.
Stats for nerds
8recommend
12mentions
12people
2013–2025years
67% recommend33% neutral
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
- I'm giving this an upvote. There isn't enough philosophy thrown around here. My thoughts: I recently read a chapter in Michael Sandel's, "Justice" where-in he gives an account of the categorical imperative described by Kant; by the end of the chapter I was having a kind of, "secular mystical experience" where I realized, "the value of everyone around me" wasn't in their biological, social, or physical self-- all these, "human objects" possessed a kind a quality that, "simple objects" don't have-- αὐτονομία or autonomy. We as, "autonomous objects" can, "decide" to do something, "other than what our socially, physically, and biological contingent self" has commanded in the, "tangible" part of our expressive selves. This makes us, "subjects" and not, "objects" a categorization sense. For me a, "demonstrable immortality" would be that if our subjective self is, "separate" from our, "tangible" self even in some, "abstract" way it stands to reason that that part of us might not be even, "living in the universe" and might not be, "subject" (pun intended?) to the causality of the the universe that we seem to be interacting with through our bodies. The Bhagavad Gita, Bhagavat Purana, and many Christian treatise' describe the realization of soul as, "eternal, separated from activity, a silent witness..."
Food for thought! Food for souls? Perhaps! Thanks for some lovely engagement paulpauper. Namaskara and Hare Krsna pal.
- The Harvard Justice series (Michael Sandel) is one of the best ones I've seen. Very intriguing!
- It really does apply, but maybe not always for obvious reasons.
I really would encourage everyone to watch Michael Sandel's political philosophy lectures (titled "Justice") at Harvard University. It's available on Youtube.
- I like thinking about affirmative action because it shine a a light a bit on one's internal moral calculus. Like do you think institutions should award exclusively on merit, or on some other aspects of their mission?
The Nobel Science Committee could argue that their mission is the advancement of science, not necessarily the advancement of society or culture. For them, it's reasonable to take the position that the award should be given out based solely on the merits of the scientist.
On the other hand the University of Texas Law School might award admission based on other parts of its mission besides just the academic merits of its applicants. For example, it might preferentially admit minorities to advance its mission of increasing minoirty representation in politics. Or it might want to correct for the testing gap, or compensate for past wrongs.
Sandel's book "Justice" opened my eyes a little bit to thinking more about "who deserves what" in a variety of social issues.
- I won’t criticize you because your ideas. Still, I’d like you to know how a society would work if we were more aligned to think like that.
There is a government philosophy called utilitarianism. It’s based on the premise that a policy is good if and only if it increases overall happiness in a society thus, ends justify the means.
It’s totally valid to be an utilitarian. Nonetheless, you have to accept two premises.
1. There is no individual rights. 2. Measuring happiness is a trivialization of human experience (ex. How many people would need to be given an iPhone in order to justify the torturing an assassination of a child?).
Try reading Justice by Michael Sandel if you want to learn more.
- I personally found utilitarianism and kantianism very helpful schools of philosophy to think about the implication of AI. In short, Utilitarianism promotes decisions that benefits the greatest number of people. Whereas, kantianism focuses on the idea that people should be always treated with dignity and respect. Michael Sandel's book "Justice" is a great introduction to the topic. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Justice-Whats-Right-Thing-Do/dp/03745...
Related
A theory of justice
23 recommend · 75
Liberalism and the Limits of Justice
1 recommend · 3
Justice as Fairness
3 recommend · 9
The Tyranny of Merit
13 recommend · 33
Spheres of Justice
1 recommend · 2
On Liberty
45 recommend · 152
The Law
17 recommend · 37