Lecture 10 – Theories of Justice
• Justice as fairness - if you ask people what sort of thing justice is, most people would at some
stage suggest that justice is pretty much the same as fairness. The only difference being that
justice is either a moral or a legal concept, whereas fairness can be something completely
different. But it seems to be a concept which is very much part of how we understand our
sense of self.
• Is justice the simple application of natural law, morality and utilitarianism to issues of
distribution/restoration of imbalance?
No. I think justice is more than that, and hopefully you will see what I mean later on, and in
particular, I think that the concept of social justice is one which needs to be examined.
PLATO
PLATO – ideal state …
• ‘The state was made up of many different people with different attributes. In the division of
labour which made up the state, some people would be naturally fitted for some tasks and
others to other tasks. The existence and threat of wars would give rise to a warrior class. The
best soldiers had to have courage. From these warriors would emerge people who had the
attribute of wisdom who should be the ultimate rulers of the state. The other people should be
craftsmen. Thus there would be three classes: ruling aristocracy, guardian warriors and
craftsmen. They are like gold, silver and bronze metal.’
He said the state was effective at the governors who should take care of an individual and
guide them throughout the whole of their life and even beyond the grave. Plato himself seems
to associate the idea of law and justice very much with the power systems within a state. He
had rather interesting views about what an ideal state should be like. That would be, in his
mind, the most just form of state. That would be what it is that made it ideal. And the state
will be made up of many different sorts of people with many different sorts of attributes. So
Plato doesn't see people as equal. He doesn't consider that equality is something which is a
virtue which should be followed. As people have different attributes, so they will be able to
perform different roles, some better than others, depending on the attributes they have. So
in the division of labour, which makes up the state, I don't forget he talks about the state as
or thinks about the state as a power structure. Some people would be naturally fitted for some
tasks, others for other tasks.
And what do you need? Well, you need to have in order to protect your state against other
states and other powers, you need to have warriors' lots of them. So the existence and threat
of wars would give rise to a class of warriors. Obviously, the best soldiers would have to have
courage. Presumably they'd also had to be very fit. And from these warriors plater, things
would emerge. People who had the attribute of wisdom would be the rulers of the state is
interesting, looking at Plato's work to consider that he thinks that all people can be physically
fit and thus could become warriors. And it's the strength of numbers, which is the important
thing. They're just as much as it is the strength of their military cunning. But some of those
would have particular attributes and attribute a wisdom would give rise to the ultimate rulers
of the state.
, Plato then goes on to say that the correct people to be the rulers of the state should be
philosophers. I can't help thinking that if you had philosophers as rulers, you might never end
up with any conclusions or decisions at all. But anyway, it's an interesting idea that the
philosophers come out of the worriers in the first place. So they would emerge first warriors,
then the rulers of the state, the philosophers. Then thirdly, there would be craftsmen and of
course you need craftsmen, because you need people who would be able to make horse
shoes, able to be able to make weapons and so on. So you need to have if you're going to run
a state thinking of it as a power structure, a ruling aristocracy of philosophers who came from
the ranks of the Warriors, the Guardian Warriors and then the Crossman. He likens these to
gold and to silver and two bronze, which is not a coincidence that these are the same metals
as you get medals in the Olympics.
PLATO – degeneration of the state …
Plato was aware of the fact that very few states are ideal, in fact I think he would suggest that there
weren't really any ideal states, all states suffer from some form of degeneration, they suffer from
some failure to reach the ideal level. So, he looks at the idea of degeneration and he comes up with
several levels:
1. The ideal state: run by philosopher rulers who rule with wisdom and impose reason. On this
form of state would be harmonius;
Because if it is a state ruled by reason, no one would have any just argument to argue against
the decisions of the rulers. So people would naturally be persuaded and go along with the
state and the way it is run and the way it decides on matters for all of us.
2. But the ideal state could degenerate into a timocracy epitomizing irrational ambition and lust
after honours;
the word timocracy, emphasising the idea of honours and ambition. The Greek word timoss
and kratoss, meaning rule. So people are looking for honours, and as a result, some people
would arise in the ascendancy to positions of power who prefer their own ambitions and
honours to the just and proper ruling of the state. You see, in an ideal state, the philosopher
rulers would not be in any way swayed by any interest, any self-interest, and so they would
make proper decisions only when there was no self-interest. But of course, there are some
that would have self-interest, they want to be well thought of, they want to have honours.
And as a result, they would not make the best of decisions. So, it's the desire for honours that
desire to be loved and liked that would lead people away from the strictly rational and into
something sub-optimal. So that's the first move from degeneration, from ideal to timocracy.
3. Further degeneration produces a plutocracy in which power is seized and held by a small
number who seek power and wealth – the rich rise and the virtuous sink;
Plutocracy – Pluto being the God of power and wealth and Cratylus again rule. So in the second
form of degeneration, people are seeking power, personal power. They want that. They want
wealth. And as a result, the rich and powerful will rise, but the virtuous will sink and disappear
from view. So again, the state will not be run on rational terms, but will be run to serve the
self-interests of those who want to have power and wealth. You can see that the common
thing between points 2 and 3 on this slide are self-interest and how it takes us away from the
purely rational third form of degeneration from the true state, the ideal state.
