write a short note on demands of equality and justice?
Answers
Equality
'E v E R Y man to count for one and no one to count for more than one.'
This formula, much used by utilitarian philosophers, seems to me to
form the heart of the doctrine of equality or of equal rights, and has
coloured much liberal and democratic thought. Like many familiar
phrases of political philosophy it is vague, ambiguous, and has changed
in connotation from one thinker and society to another. Nevertheless
it appears, more than any other formula, to constitute the irreducible
minimum of the ideal of equality. Moreover it is not self-evident in the
sense in which many simple empirical propositions seem so; it has not
been universally believed; and it is not uniquely connected with any
one philosophical system. The notion of each man counting for one
and only one does not depend on belief in rights, either natural or positive,
either divinely bestowed or adopted by convention. The statement that
each man is to count for one may, of course, be conceived as flowing
from the recognition of natural rights possessed by all men as such -
rights 'inherent' in being a man at all - whether innate, or conferred
at birth by a divine act - and so an 'inalienable' element in the 'ultimate
structure' of reality. But equally it can be held without any metaphysical
views of this kind. Again, it may be regarded as a rule, whether universal
or confined to certain defined classes of persons, deriving its validity
from a system of rights based on specific legal enactments, or custom,
or some other identifiable source of human authority. But again, it need
not depend on this. One can perfectly well conceive of a society
organised on Benthamite or Hobbesian lines, in which rights did not
exist, or played a small part, and in which the principle of 'every man
to count for one' was rigorously applied for utilitarian reasons, or
because such was the will of the despot, or of the majority, or of the
legislator or whoever held sovereignty in a given society. It is doubtless
true that the most ardent champions of equality were, in fact, believers
in human rights in some sense. Some were theists who believed that all
men had immortal souls every one of which possessed infinite value
and had claims which consequently must not be set aside in favour of
objectives of lower value; some of these in addition believed in absolute
CONCEPTS AND CATEGORIES
standards of justice, divinely sanctioned, from which the doctrine of
equality was directly deducible. Others were liberals and democrats,
some of them deists or atheists or others ignorant of, or opposed to, the
Judaeo-Christian tradition, who believed in the principle of equality
a priori, as being revealed by natural light or whatever other source or
method of knowledge was regarded as being the most certain.
Justice
Justice, in its broadest context, includes both the attainment of that which is just and the philosophical discussion of that which is just. The concept of justice is based on numerous fields, and many differing viewpoints and perspectives including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness. Often, the general discussion of justice is divided into the realm of social justice as found in philosophy, theology and religion, and, procedural justice as found in the study and application of the law.
The concept of justice differs in every culture. Early theories of justice were set out by the Ancient Greek philosophers Plato in his work The Republic, and Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics. Throughout history various theories have been established. Advocates of divine command theory argue that justice issues from God. In the 1600s, theorists like John Locke argued for the theory of natural law. Thinkers in the social contract tradition argued that justice is derived from the mutual agreement of everyone concerned. In the 1800s, utilitarian thinkers including John Stuart Mill argued that justice is what has the best consequences. Theories of distributive justice concern what is distributed, between whom they are to be distributed, and what is the proper distribution. Egalitarians argued that justice can only exist within the coordinates of equality. John Rawls used a social contract argument to show that justice, and especially distributive justice, is a form of fairness. Property rights theorists (like Robert Nozick) also take a consequentialist view of distributive justice and argue that property rights-based justice maximizes the overall wealth of an economic system. Theories of retributive justice are concerned with punishment for wrongdoing. Restorative justice (also sometimes called "reparative justice") is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of victims and offenders.
Equality refers o treating each and every person in the same manner without any bias. Justice is treating people fairly on the basis of laws and legislation that are made for the welfare of the people
Explanation:
- Equality is when people are treated in an equal manner irrespective of the caste, color or religion. It is the method keeping things the same and in the state of being equal for each and every person. Equality is important for the people living in the society together.
- Justice is defined as giving people their right and giving them justice by punishing the wrong. It is a process of making things right in the rightful manner
- Both equality and justice are different in their own ways. Justice refers to giving an individual the rights and to remove the unfairness. Justice is applied in a systematic and principled manner for the benefit of people
To know more about justice
Justice is delayed means justice is denied. Why justice is hurried means justice in buried?
https://brainly.in/question/15437272