Justice Book Summary, by Michael J. Sandel

Want to learn the ideas in Justice better than ever? Read the world’s #1 book summary of Justice by Michael J. Sandel here.

Read a brief 1-Page Summary or watch video summaries curated by our expert team. Note: this book guide is not affiliated with or endorsed by the publisher or author, and we always encourage you to purchase and read the full book.

Video Summaries of Justice

We’ve scoured the Internet for the very best videos on Justice, from high-quality videos summaries to interviews or commentary by Michael J. Sandel.

1-Page Summary of Justice

Overview

Justice is a topic that has been debated for many years. It’s difficult to understand because it changes with time and culture. For example, is it right to sacrifice one person’s life in order to save many others? Is it fair for the rich to pay taxes so the poor can have more money? Is abortion murder or a human right?

The answer to this question depends on the person. Everyone has different norms, values and experiences that influence their judgment.

Moreover, in the history of philosophy, we can see that different philosophers had different definitions of justice. For example, Aristotle’s definition was based on virtue and living a good life; therefore, it would be difficult to define what is just without first defining what constitutes a good life.

Utilitarianism is a modern philosophy that says justice should be about the general good.

Other modern theories like the Libertarian philosophy believe that the most important part of a just society is to guarantee freedom for every individual.

Big Idea #1: We sharpen our sense of justice by exploring different philosophical perspectives.

Although it is impossible to define justice, we can look at different theories of justice and compare them.

Therefore, we shouldn’t think of philosophers as people who are outdated and irrelevant to our modern times. Instead, they’re great thinkers that can help us find answers to many of the questions we have in today’s society. For example: How should progressive taxes be viewed? What does it mean when you make a promise that you can’t keep? Can same sex marriage be argued for effectively? And philosophers like Kant, Aristotle and John Rawls give us the answers to these questions so that we can use them to come up with our own solutions.

In order to be just, we must take into account various theories. This will make us more open-minded and allow us to see things in a new light.

We can develop our own idea of what is just by asking questions, comparing different answers and judging them using the standards promoted in each school of philosophy.

Big Idea #2: The Utilitarians: Actions are just when they promote the common good.

Jeremy Bentham, an English philosopher and social reformer, was the founder of Utilitarianism. He assumed that people want to pursue pleasure and well-being while avoiding pain and unhappiness. This assumption is at the heart of Utilitarianism’s moral standard.

According to this philosophy, actions that bring happiness are moral. Actions that cause unhappiness or suffering are wrong. It’s never one person’s own happiness that matters but the happiness of others. A truly just action brings happiness to many people, not only an individual.

Although a sex murder might benefit the murderer, it would cause pain and suffering for the victim’s family and friends. The Utilitarian logic states that an action is morally wrong if it doesn’t promote happiness.

However, the situation changes when we talk about a dictator being killed: according to Utilitarianism, if Hitler had been assassinated in 1944, it would have been moral because his death would have saved millions of lives. One of the biggest criticisms of Utilitarianism is that it’s impossible to predict how people will feel in the future. For example, I can’t know for certain whether helping an old man cross the street will ultimately make him happy or not. However, decisions that only affect a small number of people are relatively easy to judge with Utilitarianism (e.g., should I help an old man cross the street?). But decisions that affect millions of people are more difficult and complex (e.g., which education policy will make everyone happiest?)