Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T10:25:49.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Doctrines and Dimensions of Justice: Their Historical Backgrounds and Ideological Underpinnings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2018

MATTI HÄYRY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Justice can be approached from many angles in ethical and political debates, including those involving healthcare, biomedical research, and well-being. The main doctrines of justice are liberal egalitarianism, libertarianism, luck egalitarianism, socialism, utilitarianism, capability approach, communitarianism, and care ethics. These can be further elaborated in the light of traditional moral and social theories, values, ideals, and interests, and there are distinct dimensions of justice that are captured better by some tactics than by others. In this article, questions surrounding these matters are approached with the hermeneutic idea of a distinction between “American” and “European” ways of thinking.

Keywords

justicehealthcarewell-beingvaluesidealsinterestsliberal egalitarianlibertarianluck egalitariansocialismutilitarianismcapabilities approachcommunitarianismcare ethics
Type
Special Section: Justice, Healthcare, and Wellness
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 188 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Rawls, J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1971;Google Scholar Rawls, J. Political Liberalism, extended edition. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 2005 (originally published 1993);Google Scholar Rawls, J. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2001.Google Scholar

2. Häyry, M, Vehmas, S. Disability as a test of justice in a globalising world. Journal of Global Ethics 2015;11:90–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Nozick, R. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Oxford: Blackwell; 1974.Google Scholar

4. Dworkin, R. Law’s Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1986.Google Scholar

5. Cohen, G. Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Cohen, G. If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2001;Google Scholar Cohen, G. Why Not Socialism? Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2009.Google ScholarPubMed

6. Harsanyi, J. Morality and the theory of rational behaviour. In: Sen, A, Williams, B, eds. Utilitarianism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982:39–62.Google Scholar

7. Sen, A. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2011.Google Scholar

8. Nussbaum, M. Sex and Social Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998;Google Scholar Nussbaum, M. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2006.Google Scholar

9. Sandel, M. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982;Google Scholar Sandel, M. Justice: What Is the Right Thing to Do? London: Penguin Books; 2009.Google Scholar

10. Gilligan, C. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1982.Google Scholar

11. Kohlberg, L. Essays on Moral Development Vol. I. Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice. San Francisco: Harper & Row; 1981;Google Scholar Kohlberg, L. Essays on Moral Development Vol. II. The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row; 1984.Google Scholar

12. Grotius, H (trans. Campbell AC). On the Law of War and Peace. New York and London: M. Walter Dunne; 1901 (originally published 1625).Google Scholar

13. Pufendorf, S (trans. Kennett, B, Barbeyrac, J, Carew, G, Adams, J). Of the Law of Nature and Nations. London: J. Walthoe, R. Wilkin, J. and J. Bonwicke, S. Birt, T. Ward, and T. Osborne; 1729.Google Scholar

14. Hobbes T. Leviathan, 1652; available at www.gutenberg.org/files/3207/3207-h/3207-h.htm (last accessed 22 July 2017).

15. Locke J. Two Treatises of Government, 1690; available at oll.libertyfund.org/titles/locke-the-two-treatises-of-civil-government-hollis-ed (last accessed 22 July 2017).

16. Rousseau JJ. Social Contract and Discourses, 1762; available at www.gutenberg.org/files/46333/46333-h/46333-h.htm (last accessed 22 July 2017).

17. Kant I. The Metaphysics of Morals, 1797; available at www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/5682/pg5682-images.html (last accessed 22 July 2017).

18. Habermas, J (trans. McCarthy, T). The Theory of Communicative Action, Volumes I-II. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1984–7;Google Scholar Habermas, J (trans. Lenhardt, C, Weber Nicholsen, S). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1990;Google Scholar Habermas, J (trans. Cronin, C). Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1993.Google Scholar

19. Bentham, J (ed. Burns, JH, Hart, HLA). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London and New York: Methuen; 1982 (originally published 1789);Google Scholar Bentham, J (ed. Ogden, CK). The Theory of Legislation. London: Kegan Paul & Co.; 1931.Google Scholar

20. Beccaria C. An Essay on Crimes and Punishments, 1764; available at files.libertyfund.org/files/2193/Beccaria_1476_EBk_v6.0.pdf (last accessed 22 July 2017).

21. Helvétius C-A. Essays on the Mind, 1758, available at archive.org/details/delespritoressa02helvgoog (last accessed 22 July 2017).

22. Mill JS. On Liberty, 1859; available at oll.libertyfund.org/titles/mill-on-liberty-and-the-subjection-of-women-1879-ed (last accessed 22 July 2017); Mill JS. Utilitarianism, 1863; available at oll.libertyfund.org/titles/mill-boll-48-j-s-mill-utilitarianism-1863?q=mill+utilitarianism (last accessed 22 July 2017). Compare Häyry M. Liberal Utilitarianism and Applied Ethics. London: Routledge; 1994.

23. Herder JG (trans. Churchill T). Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man. New York: Bergman; 1966 (originally published 1784–91).

24. Cohen, GA. The workers and the word: Why Marx had the right to think he was right. Praxis 1968;3:376–90;Google Scholar Cohen, GA. Are workers forced to sell their labor power? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1985;14:99–105.Google Scholar

25. Hume D. Treatise of Human Nature, 1738; available at oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hume-the-philosophical-works-of-david-hume-vol-2-1828-ed (last accessed 22 July 2017).

26. Smith A. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1976 (originally published 1759).

27. These countries have, since the nineteenth century, included the United States; however, the connection to ideals of justice was, before the serious rise of feminism in academia, only made via American pragmatism, which informed Rawls’s theory.

28. Hegel GWF (trans. Sibree J). Philosophy of History. London: Henry G. Bohn; 1857 (originally pubished 1837).

29. Croce B (trans. Ainsley D). Aesthetic: As Science of Expression and General Linguistic. New York: The Noonday Press; 1972 (1902).

30. Gentile G. The Theory of Mind as Pure Act, 1922; available online archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.208004 (last accessed 22 July 2017).

31. Nietzsche F (trans. Zimmern H). Beyond Good and Evil, 1886; available online: archive.org/stream/BeyondGoodAndEvil_257/bygdv#page/n0/mode/2up (last accessed 22 July 2017).

32. Ortega y Gasset J (trans. Anonymous). The Revolt of the Masses, 1929; available at archive.org/stream/TheRevoltOfTheMassesJoseOrtegaYGasset/Philosophy%20-%20The%20Revolt%20of%20the%20Masses%20-%20Ortega%20y%20Gasset%20Jose#page/n5/mode/2up (last accessed 22 July 2017).

33. Sartre J-P (trans. Barnes HE). Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology, 1943; available at archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.6651 (last accessed 22 July 2017).

34. Beauvoir S de (trans. Borde C, Malovant-Chevallier S). The Second Sex, 1949; available at archive.org/details/1949SimoneDeBeauvoirTheSecondSex (last accessed 22 July 2017).

35. Arendt H. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. New York: The Viking Press; 1964 (originally published 1963).

36. Horkheimer M, Adorno T (transl. Jephcott E). Dialectic of Enlightenment, 1944; available at archive.org/stream/pdfy-TJ7HxrAly-MtUP4B/Dialectic%20of%20Enlightenment%20-%20Theodor%20W.%20Adorno%2C%20Max%20Horkheimer#page/n0/mode/2up (last accessed 22 July 2017).

37. Horkheimer M. Eclipse of Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1947.

38. Marcuse H. One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. London and New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1964.

39. Derrida J (trans. Allison DB, Garver N). Speech and Phenomena: And Other Essays on Husserl’s Theory of Signs. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press; 1973 (originally published 1967).

40. Foucault M. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Pantheon Books; 1970 (originally published 1966).

41. Deleuze G (trans. Patton PR). Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press; 1994 (originally published 1966).

42. Lacan J (trans. Sheridan A). The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. New York: WW Norton; 1978 (originally published 1973).

43. Baudrillard J (trans. Glaser S). Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1994 (originally published 1981).

44. Kristeva J (trans. Roudiez LS). Powers on Horror: An Essay on Abjection. New York: Columbia University Press; 1982 (originally published 1980).

45. Rancière J (trans. Ross K). The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1991 (originally published 1987).

46. Butler J. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London and New York: Routledge; 1990.

47. It has to be noted that the labels used here for convenience have not always been accepted by the theorists themselves. None of the “poststructuralists” have embraced the term (which is of American origin), “communitarians” rarely call themselves by the name, and “luck egalitarians” have not felt comfortable about the title. Because some accessible names have to be used, however, this usage follows prevailing academic conventions.

48. Finnis J. Natural Law and Natural Rights, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.

49. As noted by Jonathan Crowe in a review of Finnis’s work, which is available at ndpr.nd.edu/news/46786-reason-morality-and-law-the-philosophy-of-john-finnis/ (last accessed 22 July 2017).

50. See, for example, The Stand. Expert Witnesses and Ancient Mysteries in a Colorado Courtroom, Lingua Franca, September/October, 1996; available at http://linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9609/stand.html (last accessed 22 July 2017).

51. See, for example, McInerny R. Natural law and human rights. American Journal of Jurisprudence 1991;36 (republished on McInerny Center for Thomistic Studies website, available at http://www.thomasinternational.org/ralphmc/readings/mcinerny000.htm (last accessed 22 July 2017).

52. See note 18, Habermas 1984–7.

53. Honneth A (trans. Anderson J). The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1995 (originally published 1992).

54. Pico della Mirandola G (trans. and ed. Borghesi F, Papio M, Riva M). Oration on the Dignity of Man. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012 (originally published 1486).

55. Erasmus Roterodamus D (trans. Wilson J). The Praise of Folly, 1511; available at www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/9371 (last accessed 22 July 2017).

56. Voltaire (trans. Smollett T). Candide, 1759; available at en.wikisource.org/wiki/Candide (last accessed 22 July 2017).

57. Diderot D (trans. Johnston I). D’Alembert’s Dream, 1769; available at records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/diderot/revedalembert_tofc.htm (last accessed 22 July 2017).

58. Vico G (trans. Bergin TG, Fisch MH). New Science, 1725; available at archive.org/details/newscienceofgiam030174mbp (last accessed 22 July 2017).

59. Montesquieu (trans. Nugent T). The Spirit of the Laws, 1748; available at archive.org/details/MontesquieuTheSpiritOfLawsCambridgeIntegral (last accessed 22 July 2017).

60. The background of this section can be found in my earlier work: Häyry M. European values in bioethics: Why, what, and how to be used? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2003;24:199–214.

61. Here again, the criticized theories were not the only American attempts to make sense of ethical issues; therefore, again, “American” and “European” have to be seen as convenient figures of speech.

62. The Belmont Report, 1979; available at www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html (last accessed 22 July 2017).

63. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 1979. (This work is now in its 7th ed., 2012.)

64. Another point worth making is that the model was both criticized and hailed by Americans and Europeans alike. There was, and is, no united New World front attacking the Old World ways, and there was, and is, no united Old World front to face the alleged attack.

65. Holm S. Not just autonomy: The principles of American Biomedical Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 1995;21:332–8.

66. Compare Häyry M. Utilitarian approaches to justice in health care. In: Rhodes R, Battin MP, Silvers A, eds. Medicine and Social Justice: Essays on the Distribution of Health Care. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002:53–64. Häyry M. Utilitarianism and bioethics. In: Ashcroft R, Dawson A, Draper H, McMillan J, eds. Principles of Health Care Ethics, 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2007:57–64.

67. MacIntyre A. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 2nd ed. London: Duckworth; 1985 (originally published 1981).

68. Rendtorff JD, Kemp P, eds. Basic Ethical Principles in European Bioethics and Biolaw, Volumes 1 and 2. Copenhagen and Barcelona: Centre for Ethics and Law & Institut Borja de Bioètica; 2000. Compare Häyry M, Takala T. American principles, European values, and the mezzanine rules of ethical genetic data banking. In: Häyry M, Chadwick R, Árnason V, Árnason G, eds. The Ethics and Governance of Human Genetic Databases: European Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007:14–36.

69. Compare Häyry M. Another look at dignity. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2004;13:7–14; Häyry M. The tension between self-governance and absolute inner worth in Kant’s moral philosophy. Journal of Medical Ethics 2005;31:645–7; Häyry M, Takala T. Human dignity, bioethics, and human rights. Developing World Bioethics 2005;5:225–33; Takala T. Concepts of “person” and “liberty,” and their implications to our fading notions of autonomy. Journal of Medical Ethics 2007;33:225–8.

70. For example, Häyry M. Rationality and the Genetic Challenge: Making People Better? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010. The foundation of this kind of thinking was laid out in Jonas H. The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of Ethics for the Technological Age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1979. Compare Häyry M, Takala T. Genetic engineering and the risk of harm. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 1998;1:61–4; Häyry M. Precaution and solidarity. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2005;14:199–206; Holm S, Takala T. High hopes and automatic escalators: A critique of some new arguments in bioethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 2007;33:1–4.

71. Interest in this idea grew at approximately the same time that Kemp and others were working on their principles: see, for example, Godard O, ed. Le Principe de Précaution dans la Conduite des Affaires Humaines [The Principle of Precaution in the Conduct of Human Affairs]. Paris: Coéditions INRA, MSH et Association Natures, Sciences, Société-Dialogues, 1997; Kaiser M. “The precautionary principle and its implications for science— Introduction.” Foundations of Science 1997;2:201–5; Hansson SO. The limits of precaution. Foundations of Science 1997;2:293–306.

72. Bayertz K, ed. Solidarity and the welfare state. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1998;1:293–392; Houtepen, R, ter Meulen, R, eds. Solidarity in health care. Health Care Analysis 2000;8:329–411. Compare Takala T. Justice for all?—The Scandinavian approach. In: Rhodes R, Battin M, Silvers A, eds. Medicine and Social Justice: Essays on the Distribution of Health Care. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002:183–90. Takala T, Häyry M. Is communitarian thinking altruistic? Trames 2004;8:276–83; Takala T. Gender, disability and personal identity. In: Kristiansen K, Shakespeare T, Vehmas S, eds. Arguing about Disability: Developing a Philosophical Framework. London: Routledge; 2009:124–33, Takala T. Human before sex? Ectogenesis as a way to equality. In: Simonstein F, ed. Reprogen Ethics and the Future of Gender. New York: Springer; 2009:187–95, Ahola-Launonen J. The evolving idea of social responsibility in bioethics: A welcome trend. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2016;25:448–65.

73. I acknowledge, with gratitude, that the contents of this section have been influenced by my exchanges with Heikki Ervasti. Any mistakes remain mine.

74. European Social Survey is available at www.europeansocialsurvey.org/about/index.html (last accessed 22 July 2017).

75. European Social Survey. Welfare Attitudes in Europe: Topline Results from Round 4 of the European Social Survey, November 2012; available at www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/findings/ESS4_toplines_issue_2_welfare_attitudes_in_europe.pdf (last accessed 22 July 2017).

76. Suggestions by Curtice J, Bryson C. Chapter 6: The measurement of socio-political orientations, n.d.; available at www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/methodology/core_ess_questionnaire/ESS_core_questionnaire_socio_political_orientations.pdf (last accessed 22 July 2017).

77. See note 70, Häyry 2010. This idea was employed in another context in Rationality and the Genetic Challenge.

78. In any further work, it has to be asked “Why?” however. Is this a value in itself or a means to some other end?

79. See, for example, note 51, McInerny 1991.

80. For example, Fuller LL. The Morality of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1964.

81. Mill J. Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind. London; Baldwin and Cradock; 1829.

82. Fukuyama F. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: The Free Press; 1992.

83. Ironically, this also applies to the ideals of deliberative democracy and communicative action in the middle of the conceptual map. They can equally well be overstated, as in Plato’s conception of justice as the “harmony of the soul” and in literal interpretations of Habermas’s “Herrshaftsfreier Diskurs.”

84. I acknowledge, with gratitude, that the contents of this section have been influenced by my exchanges with Annamari Vitikainen. Any mistakes remain mine.

85. Wilkinson R, Kate Pickett K. The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger. New York: Bloomsbury Press; 2011.

86. Weber M (trans. Waters D, Waters T). The distribution of power with the Gemeinschaft: Classes, Stände, parties. In: Waters D, Waters T, eds. Weber’s Rationalism and Modern Society: New Translations on Politics, Bureaucracy and Social Stratification. New York: Palgrave MacMillan; 2015 (originally published 1922).

87. Walzer M. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books, 1983.