Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 10: "THE GOOD CITIZEN" | Summary and Q&A

Transcript

Read and summarize the transcript of this video on Glasp Reader (beta).

Summary

In this video, the speaker discusses Aristotle's theory of justice, which argues that justice is a matter of giving people what they deserve. The speaker explores the teleological nature of Aristotle's theory, which looks at the purpose or end of social practices and institutions when determining how to distribute justice. The speaker examines two examples - the distribution of political offices and honors, and the debate about whether Casey Martin, a golfer with a disability, should be allowed to use a golf cart in professional tournaments. These examples highlight how debates about the purpose of a social practice are also debates about honor and recognition. The video concludes by considering the tension between teleological theories of justice and the concept of freedom.

Questions & Answers

Q: According to Aristotle, what is justice and how does it differ from theories proposed by Kant and Rawls?

Aristotle argues that justice is a matter of giving people what they deserve and that it is intrinsically tied to moral desert and virtue. He disagrees with Kant and Rawls, who try to detach considerations of justice and rights from questions of moral desert and virtue.

Q: In Aristotle's theory of justice, why is it important to reason about the purpose or end of social practices and institutions?

According to Aristotle, when determining how to distribute justice, we should reason about the purpose or end of social practices and institutions. This is because justice is intrinsically tied to giving people what they deserve, and in order to determine what people deserve, we need to consider the purpose or end of the thing being distributed.

Q: What is the central idea of Aristotle's theory of justice?

The central idea of Aristotle's theory of justice is that in reasoning about justice and rights, we have to reason about the purpose or end of social practices and institutions. This helps us determine what people deserve and how justice should be distributed.

Q: In the example of flutes discussed by Aristotle, who does he argue should get the best flutes and why?

In the example of flutes, Aristotle argues that the best flute players should get the best flutes. This is because giving the best flute to the best flute player honors their excellence and rewards their virtue.

Q: How does teleological reasoning apply to debates about the distribution of political offices and honors?

According to Aristotle, when determining how political authority should be distributed, we need to inquire into the purpose or end of politics. For Aristotle, politics is about forming character, cultivating the virtue of citizens, and realizing the good life. Therefore, those who contribute the most to the good life should have a greater share in political rule and honors.

Q: Is political participation essential to living a good life, according to Aristotle?

According to Aristotle, political participation is essential to living a good life. He argues that only by participating in politics can we fully realize our nature as human beings and exercise our capacity for language and deliberation. Political participation is necessary to virtue and happiness.

Q: What is the criticism of Aristotle's view that political participation is necessary for living a virtuous life?

One criticism of Aristotle's view is that it doesn't leave room for the possibility of living a virtuous life without participating in politics. Some may argue that virtue can be acquired through other means, such as moral education or individual contemplation. Aristotle, however, argues that virtue is a practice that can only be learned and developed through the exercise of virtues in the context of political community.

Q: How does the example of Casey Martin and the debate about allowing him to use a golf cart demonstrate the link between debates about justice and honor?

The example of Casey Martin and the debate about allowing him to use a golf cart in professional tournaments illustrates how debates about the purpose of a social practice or game are also debates about what qualities should be honored. By allowing Casey Martin to use a golf cart, it would change the nature of golf as an athletic competition and potentially undermine the honor and recognition of certain virtues associated with the game.

Q: What are some objections to Aristotle's teleological account of justice?

One objection to Aristotle's teleological account of justice is that it doesn't leave room for freedom. Critics argue that if justice is based on fitting individuals into certain roles or purposes, it restricts individual freedom to choose one's own roles and purposes. There is concern that teleological theories of justice can undermine equal basic rights and the ability to define one's own conception of the good life.

Q: How does Aristotle defend the institution of slavery? What criticisms can be made of his defense?

Aristotle argues that slavery is necessary for the functioning of a political community, as there must be some individuals who perform menial tasks to free up others for political deliberation. He also argues that there are individuals who are naturally suited for slavery based on their abilities and traits. However, critics point out that the institution of slavery in practice often goes against the idea of fitting individuals into roles that are appropriate for them. Slavery often resulted from individuals being captured in war, rather than being naturally suited for the role. There is a misfit between these individuals and their roles, leading to coercion and injustice.

Takeaways

Aristotle's teleological account of justice argues that justice is a matter of giving people what they deserve and is tied to the purpose or end of social practices and institutions. This teleological reasoning is also tied to debates about honor and recognition. However, there are objections to Aristotle's view, particularly regarding the compatibility with freedom and the potential restriction of individual choice and rights. Additionally, his defense of slavery raises concerns about the misfit between individuals and their roles, which undermines the idea of justice as fit.