A Conceptual Structure of Justice - Providing a Tool to Analyse Conceptions of Justice

Abstract

Justice is a contested concept. There are many different and competing conceptions, i.e. interpretations of the concept. Different domains of justice deal with different fields of application of justice claims, such as structural justice, distributive justice, participatory justice or recognition. We present a formal conceptual structure of justice applicable to all these domains. We show that conceptions of justice can be described by specifying the following conceptual elements: the judicandum (that which is to be judged as just or unjust), the community of justice including claim holders and claim addressees, their claims (and obligations), the informational base for the assessment, the principles of justice, and on a more practical level, the instruments of justice. By specifying these conceptual elements of justice, it is possible to analyse and compare different conceptions of justice, to assess their internal consistency, to explore new definitions of justice in an analytical way, and to explicate an idea of justice in a manner that provides concrete links to the relevant context.

The just city. Three background issues: Institutional justice and spatial justice, social justice and distributive justice, concept of justice and conceptions of justice

“…In conclusion, when we ask what is the judicandum in our case (i.e. what is judged to be just or unjust: Stumpf et al, 2016), the answer is that sets of institutions are the judicanda . From this perspective, a just city is therefore a city whose public institutions are just .…”

“…In general, the crucial point is that, when speaking of (social) justice, we should distinguish more clearly between (a) the concept of (social) justice and (b) various conceptions of (social) justice (Gosepath, 2001; Korsgaard, 1996; Rawls, 1971; Stumpf et al, 2016).…”

“…In short, we have a concept and its conceptions: the general concept refers to the unitary idea represented by it and is constituted by a list of core features, while specific conceptions are different ways in which the general concept can be specified and represent the level at which the content and context occur (Stumpf et al, 2016: 1189). We may say that the concept poses and names the problem, while the conceptions propose and specify a solution (Korsgaard, 1996: 114).…”

Library Services for the Poor: Theoretical Framework for Library Social Responsibility

“…Justice allows us to recognize and respect the rights of others: thus, it provides legitimacy and wide support of inclusive programs in civil society. Included in such programs are provisions for access to health care, to education, and to information, among others (Stumpf et al, 2016;Manz et al, 2015).…”

“…A school library that proposes as its main purpose to operate as an efficient means of access to information, no matter how valid and pertinent the information is, would risk doing something that is necessary but not adequate. Focusing only on providing access to information is certainly not adequate for a school that is today asked to move the barycenter from having information and knowledge to being competent and capable (Stumpf et al, 2016;Odasso, 2007;Burgess, 2013).…”