Bernard Williams & Michael Sandel on Justice (2000)

In this program, Bernard Williams and Michael Sandel discuss the notion of justice. This is from a 2000 episode in a philosophy series of the radio program "The Connection", which was broadcast from WBUR FM in Boston. The host was Christopher Lydon.
#Philosophy #Ethics

[@henryvaughan757]

Best philosophy channel

[@superfuzzymomma]

Well timed post. Thank you

[@TPQ1980]

Truth is a necessary prerequisite for Justice. There can be no Justice predicated upon falsehood. While we continue to lie to ourselves and each other, we will continue to contribute to injustice's perpetuation. Very wealthy people with high social status who have a lot of power use their power to promote self-serving lies, thus promoting injustice.

[@newtonswig]

40:05 just a lovely little moment of Socratic refutation in the wild!
Makes me think how often most of what people say is too woolly to refute.

[@tylerhulsey982]

“The fundamental question is: What is reality? Did it happen? Did it exist?” 🤯

[@xxcrysad3000xx]

Well, did it or didn't it? What are the facts of the matter? Fairly straightforward. More abstract is asking well, can I trust the evidence of my own senses? Of my own mind? What is justice? Is IT real? Is it "out there" in the world just waiting to be discovered? Or does it somehow depend upon us, emerge out of us, either individually or collectively? That really IS the fundamental question.

[@sabyasachisenapati3619]

the question of encroachment is an important one. some say " your right to waive your fist should fall short of my face." but there is no consensus regarding where does one's face begin and end. if one takes offense in things, in which he has the option not to take offense, then we have a problem. encroachment has occured. on the other hand if one choses not to take offense, or he has so to speak a quite slender face, then there is no issue.

[@The1Helleri]

All the definitions for justice given here were proposed and knocked down in dialogue between Socrates and Thrasymachus, in Plato's The Republic. However, there is one definition that was suggested there never gets resolved in that conversation is "Justice is the advantage of the stronger." I've yet to see a succeeding assailment on that definition.

[@christophergiofreda564]

I think it's adequately answered in the "Gorgias." See the section with Polus concerning the tyrant and the fable of souls at the end of the dialogue. If justice really is the virtue of the stronger, then it would seem that Socrates would not quibble with Gorgias over his unwillingness to teach students justice, right? Just a thought.

[@The1Helleri]

@@christophergiofreda564 Just now ordered that one off abebooks.

[@Doctor.T.46]

Following on from Rawls was his student Thomas Pogge, who talked about Global Justice.

[@manuelmanuel9248]

Morality and justice are social constructs which are subjective. Some opinions about morality even vary in the same society. Matters like the death penalty are a matter of opinion. Perhaps there is almost universal agreement that the the perverted crimes of psychopaths are immoral.

[@ivancoleman1025]

Read Plato's Republic and get back to us.

[@nanashi7779]

It's impossible for all moral truths to be subjective

[@manuelmanuel9248]

@@nanashi7779 tell me one that is not

[@ivancoleman1025]

@@manuelmanuel9248 Sex crimes against children are unjust. Convince me otherwise.

[@manuelmanuel9248]

@@ivancoleman1025 define children. The date of consent has varied thru time and geographically. In some countries girls of less than 12 are married off to grown men with social approval. Again, this supports the social construct theory.

[@noshirm6285]

One of the callers - at about 36:05 - is seriously deluded. 🙄