Rate this book

The Idea Of Justice (2009)

by Amartya Sen(Favorite Author)

3.96 of 5 Votes: 4

ISBN

0674036131 (ISBN13: 9780674036130)

languge

English

genre

History & Biography

publisher

Belknap Press

review 1: This was one of the first books I have read on the philosophical discourse on what an idea of justice is bound to be. The author Amrtya Sen presents the true idea of Justice as an idea of Transcendentalism which is obtained by social consensus rather than Instsutionalism which advocates the presence of strong institutions which follow some rules and regulations to deliver justice. The author relates his idea to the Indian conception of justice as nyaya (focused on comprehensive social realizations), rather than merely niti (rules and institutions). In this intricate and thought-provoking book, Sen tries his best and succeeds to a great extent in analyzing some specific questions – of chronic malnourishment, ill-health, demographic gender imbalance – in terms of justi... morece. Doing something about these issues is not a discretionary matter – it is a requirement of being human.Go for it in case you need some quality material to stimulate your grey cells.
review 2: Readable and well argued, but ultimately just a little disappointing because it seems to me that his core criteria don't really help us to make hard choices on moral issues. If most people agree that something is an evil, of course it is good that they should get together to remove it; but probably they don't need an elaborate theory of justice to do so. Really, a theory is most needed when it comes to making precisely the sort of difficult choices that Sen's notion of agreed partial rankings excludes - for example, between the rival claims of different sorts of equality (as in his example of the children and the flute).I agree with Sen's broad premise, on the value extending debate via the Smithian 'impartial spectator', on the value of inputs from other cultures, in the importance of processes as well as outcomes, and so on. And his point that elaborate theories of justice (such as Rawls) are not much use in making context-dependent real world choices is very helpful.But sometimes we perhaps need to go beyond what can be agreed consensually and through open debate, and just stick up for what we strongly believe to be right. Sen gives no real guide on when it might be legitimate to do this. He gives the example of the abolition of slavery, but the abolition of the slave trade by Britain and the subsequent enforcement of this by the Royal Navy went well beyond what could have achieved Sen-like agreement in the 1820's in a process of informed rational debate; it was an assertion of power, in support of one set if values, and almost certainly would now be seen as a violation of international law. Does that mean it was 'unjust'? less

Download links for: The Idea Of Justice

Advertising