Only $2.99/month

Terms in this set (45)

Was a very influential ethical philosophy

Word derived from its initiation by Zeno (3rd century B.C.)
Is supposed to have lectured from porch called a stoa

Classical Greek philosophers shaped their views of virtue and good life from community of small city-states
But this form of social organization no longer existed

Thought that new social structure required new philosophy

Stoics offered advice to individuals in what for them was crumbling world

Basic principle advocated by Stoics is one should learn to be indifferent to external differences

Advocated philosophy of indifference
Believed practice constitute progress for individual

Best known Stoics
Marcus Aurelius

Stoics assumed good or evil depends upon the self, and although others have power over events that may affect you, if you can nevertheless be indifferent to those events, others will not be able to exercise power over you (Prior, 1991)

Ethics of Stoicism
Should be understood in context of their belief in predestination
All that happens in world is fixed according to some preconceived divine plan
Nothing happens by chance (Prior, 1991)

Whatever happened had rational explanation and was for best

Virtue achieved through will that operates in accordance with happenings of nature

Aim is to achieve state of being where one is not susceptible to passion or emotion

It places onus for becoming good or bad directly upon individual, in sense that cultivating appropriate frame of mind will lead to virtue

Stoics believed in commitment to serving public
Distinguishes it from hedonism
A Theory of Justice (John Rawls, 1973)

Discussed concept of justice

Aimed to work out theory of justice that represents alternative to utilitarian thought

Favored emphasis on rights of individuals rather than means-end technique of thinking used by utilitarians

In order for moral persons to develop moral capabilities, is necessary for them to create a society and agree on principles that will govern it
Agreement should be result of fair procedure designed with fair conditions (Alegandro, 1998)

In this model, persons who must decide and conclude agreement are men and women of ordinary talents and tastes
Agreement called original position

Principles of justice chosen behind veil of ignorance
Ensures no one will gain advantage or suffer disadvantage because of particular circumstances in society

Attempts to demonstrate that if parties are rational and act only in own self-interest, they will choose two principles of justice put forward (Rawls, 1973)
Each person is to have equal right to most extensive basic liberty compatible with similar liberty for others
Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that both are (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all

Social justice
Crux of Rawls' (1973) discussion
Sees justice as basic structure of society and as basis for describing how major social institutions distribute fundamental rights and duties

Principles of justice make up only part of complete set of principles needed to define social ideal
Perhaps the most important part

Advocates notion that just society would conform to above two principles by incorporating them into its basic structure
Notion is that if we apply principles to our beliefs as well as to facts and circumstances, we will make judgments that will give effect to principles

Principle's application is much broader because it is to apply to all inequalities in primary social goods

Contends any inequality must benefit everyone but in particular must benefit least advantaged (Jones, 1980)

Equality is mark of social justice
Any acts promoting equality are justified provided they do not worsen situation of least advantaged

Difference principle
Reflects Kantian principle that people are never to be treated as means to an end but always as ends in themselves (Darwall, 1980)

As to distribution of wealth and income under second principle
While distribution of these need not be equal
Must be to advantage of all
Positions of authority and offices of command must be accessible to everyone

Rawls (1973) sees two principles as part of more general conception of justice, which he expresses in following terms:
All social values-liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and basis of self-respect-are to be distributed equally unless unequal distribution of any, or all, of these values is to everyone's advantage

Emphasizes principles are for institutions to follow

Stresses need to avoid confusing principles of justice that apply to institutions with those that apply to individuals and their actions

Important to keep in mind that principles and original position concern hypothetical people in hypothetical situation
What is revealed is simply that if there were such people who went through process, then principles they agreed on would be justified (Holmes, 1998)
Is there fair, equal, and just application of the laws or are laws applied unfairly, unequally, or unjustly to certain groups by the criminal justice system?

Any examination of questions of inequality, unfairness, and the just application of laws would have to consider the position of marginalized groups such as the poor, minorities, and those without power in society.

Are such groups treated unjustly by the criminal justice system?

For example, are they subject to higher rates of arrest than other groups?

Is there discrimination based on race, gender, or socioeconomic status within the criminal justice system?

The discussion in Chapter 3 reveals that criminologists dispute the existence of any systematic discrimination within the criminal justice system, but agree that discrimination does occur at specific points in the system.

Does the criminal justice system treat women differently than men, and has increased policing of drug use affected women disproportionately?

Is there equal and fair access to justice regardless of race, gender, or socioeconomic status in the criminal justice system?

An examination of this issue would have to consider the racial disproportionality of the U.S. prison population, and in particular the effects of the "war on drugs" and "three strikes" legislation.

If minorities have less wealth, does this mean they are disadvantaged if they come into contact with the criminal justice system?

Can access to justice be improved for those without wealth, or must we simply accept the fact that inequalities will continue and that society will not follow Rawls's hypothetical model of surrendering equality in favor of advantaging the disadvantaged?