Essay Example on Central Theme This book tries to explain the justice from three Aspects

Subcategory:

Category:

Words:

382

Pages:

1

Views:

26

How do we approach the problems rationally from justice and injustice equality and inequality individual rights and the common good that contentious area pg 28 The author Sandal also mentions different views about justice from several philosophers and captures the meaning of justice from analysis of those views His argument is whether a person's behavior is justice depends on the individual conviction and whether his ideas correspond with the mainstream consciousness A simple explanation is that a person makes a decision that is not accepted by the public and his behavior is unjust from others views Critical Analysis People are easy to weigh justice with utilitarianism They always follow the minority vote and sacrifice individual interests to fulfill the most Sandel mentions a problem in the book People drive a car on the road and four pedestrians cross the road You have no time to stop and you only have two options one is to hit the four pedestrians which in front of you the second is to turn right into a passer by on the sidewalk The most glaring weakness of utilitarianism is that it fails to respect individual rights pg 37 



I agree with him If life as a basic unit the cost of a person's life in exchange for four people to be saved is the best solution But I think utilitarianism doesn t work in a complicated context The example mentioned by Sandel can be extended to the law Pedestrians who cross the road already broke the law of traffic but the other person is innocent From the egoism I bumped into people who broke the law and it was not my fault From the logical angle four pedestrians who violate traffic laws are not equal to a regular pedestrian It seems to me that utilitarianism takes effect only on certain occasions such as voting and elections The example of sacrifice is really out of line Sandel also talks about his argument on libertarianism Libertarians are using the brand of human freedom to cast off the guidance of market and the regulation of government pg 59 I disagree argument of libertarians people are free to make their own decision but the regulation must be observed He mentioned the libertarians used celebrity charm as rule The Michael Jordan not to be taxed because of his outstanding achievement Libertarians thought those people who contribute their life to the work should not be taxed too I think most of them are less contribution than Michael Jordan if everyone uses this example as an excuse to evade tax the whole society would be abandon Freedom not equal loose People need the rule to regularize behavior and that's no difference between animal and self indulgence 



The baseline of moral is law Perhaps the law is not perfect and some people use wealth and power to evade the law But with the progress of society the law will be improved Sandel mentions Kant's theory a deontological moral theory The right behavior is not dependent on their results but whether they fulfill our obligations Kant thought it s supreme principle of morality I totally agree his opinion but most of us not the saint and we often violate our responsibilities for our own selfish desires If I am making the driver s decision I mentioned and I see four people are crossing the road and one person is walking on the street I probably would head to the one person I don't have time to think about its four people responsibility but it is better to minimize harm to one person My intention is to minimize the damage this is the most ethical choice at that moment But it might be more appropriate to protect a person who obeys traffic rule from an outsider's perspective Main Takeaways What I ve learned is that different perspectives and different moral codes lead to different ways of thinking In some people s perception their moral baseline does not break the law But the most of rules are more nuanced As an example of the use of game cheaters Online games as the emerging industry it doesn't have relevant laws to protect player s benefit and many people use the software cheating to satisfy their desires For example using the auxiliary software to obtain the enemy s position or auxiliary aiming in a shooting game These people don't think they have used these improper means to achieve certain results cheating in exams He's just using his auxiliary software to release his own pressure and he's not at fault I have a hard time convincing these people because everyone has a different code of ethics and people have different priorities My present restraint to myself is to constraint my desires as much as I can and to be rational justice I wish I could learn more about the critical thinking between morality and law in Jasso s lecture


Write and Proofread Your Essay
With Noplag Writing Assistance App

Plagiarism Checker

Spell Checker

Virtual Writing Assistant

Grammar Checker

Citation Assistance

Smart Online Editor

Start Writing Now

Start Writing like a PRO

Start