Justice And Free Market System Topic 3

3.0 JUSTICE AND FREE MARKET SYSTEM

3.1 The Nature of JusticeThis is an old concept and fundamental to any discussion of how society ought to be organized. During the Greek era, the popular philosopher, Plato argues that justice seems to have been the paramount virtue with regards to our relationship with others. However, today philosophers have differentiated justice with the whole of morality. Sometimes the just and unjust are vague.Related ideas of justice

Fairness Equality Desert/deserve

RightsFairnessi. Justice frequently concerns the fair treatment of members of groups of people/the fair compensation of prior injuries.

ii. It is difficult to determine the requirement of fairness as different standards may be pertinent in different cases.

iii. Aristotle formal principle of justice required people to treat similar cases alike except where there is some relevant difference.

iv. It emphasizes on the role of impartially and consistency of justice.

Equalityi. Justice is frequently held to require that our treatment of people reflect their fundamental moral equality.

ii. The claim of injustice based on equality is meant to place the burden proof on those who endorse unequal treatment.

iii. Some differences in the treatment of persons are not consistent with equality and neither respect for equality nor commitment to equal treatment necessarily implies an equal distribution of economic goods.

iv. A moral doctrine which states people should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of good (happiness/pleasure) over bad for everyone affected by our actions. The action is right if it can create the greatest happiness of all.

Deserve/deserti. Individual circumstances will make a difference.ii. Something in addition to equal or impartial treatment.iii. Justice also requires that people get what they deserve (that each receive his/her due.)Rights.i. The ideas of John Stuart Mill

ii. People are treated unjustly when their moral rights are violated.Types of JusticeDistributive JusticeRetributive JusticeCompensatory Justice

Distributing societys benefits and burden fairly. The fundamental of this principle holds that the equals should treated equally and equals treated unequally.

Blaming and punishing persons fairly for doing wrong i.e. the punishment of wrongdoers. Restoring to a person what the person lost when he or she was wronged by someone else i.e. a matter of compensating persons for wrongs done to them.

Rival Principles of Distribution (Distributive Justice):The proper distribution of social benefits and burdens based on several principles:.

To each an equal share.

To each according to an individual need.

To each according to personal effort.

To each according to social contribution. To each according to merit.(Each of these principles has its advocates, and each seems plausible in some circumstances).To each an equal share. When a company distributes its yearly bonuses, each eligible party should receive a portion equal to every other eligible party.

To each according to individual need.

Resources should be allocated to individuals and departments in terms of the level of need they experience.

To each according to personal effort. Everything else being equal, employees should receive pay increases or pay cuts in direct proportion to their level of effort.To each according to social contribution. If a company is making a special effort to address social issues, it should receive rewards that other companies less careful about the environment may not get.

To each according to merit.

Promotion, hiring and firing decisions should be done on the basis of individual merit and no other consideration such as nepotism, favourism or personal bias.Drawbacks of the principles.i. If equality of income were guaranteed, the lazy would receive as much as the industrious.ii. Effort is hard to measure and compare.Implications of Distributive Justicei. Different principles of Distributive Justice can be applied in different circumstances.ii. Multiple principles may often be relevant to a single situation.3.2 The Utilitarian View on JusticeThe argument on justice for utilitarian was based on John Stuart Millss view. He relates the issue of justice with maximizing the societys happiness. He perceives justice was ultimately a matter of promoting social well-being. What utilitarianism identifies as rights are certain moral rules, the observance of which is of the utmost importance for the long-run, overall maximization of happiness.

The concept of justice identifies certain important social utilities (rules of rights) the upholding of which is crucial for social well-being. For utilitarianism, then justice is not an independent moral standard, distinct from their general principle.Mill asked: is it just or not that more talented workers should receive a greater remuneration?There are 2 possible answers:i. Negative view whoever does the best he can deserves equally well and ought not in justice to be put in a position of inferiority for no fault of his own.

ii. Positive view the society receives more from the more efficient laborer, his services being more useful, society owes him a larger return for them.From the above arguments, it seems that both were seems plausible based on Mills ideas.

Utilitarian and Economic DistributionUtilitarian want an economic system that will bring more benefits to society than any other system. However the kind of system will be depended on the relevant social, economic and political facts. Deciding what sort of economic arrangements would best promote human happiness requires that utilitarian to consider many things, including:i. The type of economic ownership (private, public, mixed);ii. The way of organizing production and distribution in general, (pure laissez faire, market with government planning and regulation, fully centralized planning);iii. The type of authority arrangements within the units of production (worker control versus managerial prerogative);

iv. The range and character of material incentives;

v. The nature and extent of social security and welfare provision.Worker participationMill argued for desirability of breaking down the sharp and hostile division between the producers, or workers, on the other hand, and the capitalist, or owners, on the other. These developments would not only enhance productivity but, more importantly, promotes the fuller development and well-being of the people involved.

Greater Equality of IncomeUtilitarian are likely to believe that making the distribution of income more equal is a good strategy for maximizing happiness. Currently, the utilitarian are likely to advocate increased economic equality.Business Ethics/ MGT 3533Page 3