THE SPATIAL RANGE OF ‘SOCIAL JUSTICE’
The idea of 'social justice' has its roots in the original moral feelings developed in small groups, where individuals would feel a duty to help those they knew personally. However, in a larger society, known as the Great or Open Society, interactions extend beyond familiar people to strangers and foreigners. This shift means that the rules of justice must also apply to these unknown individuals. While a liberal society aims to treat everyone with the same respect and fairness, this often means simplifying the obligations one has toward others.
In small communities, people have a clear understanding of each other's contributions and needs, which facilitates a sense of moral obligation. However, in larger societies, these personal connections are lost, making it difficult to determine what constitutes 'social justice' on a broader scale. This leads to challenges when people advocate for justice nationally while failing to extend that same concern to foreigners or those outside their immediate group.
Moreover, the effectiveness of national policies on justice often overlooks the complexities of international relationships and humanitarian needs. As the rules for justice broaden, they necessitate a simplification of duties owed to those in smaller groups. The principles that can be generalized for interaction in a larger society must be less specific than those for close-knit communities.
Ultimately, while striving for fairness in the Open Society promotes equality, it can dilute the strong moral obligations individuals feel toward those they know personally. This reflects a shift from instinctive actions based on familiarity to rational principles of justice that apply universally. The challenge remains in balancing these evolving moral standards while recognizing the limitations imposed by expanding social networks.
The idea of 'social justice' has its roots in the original moral feelings developed in small groups, where individuals would feel a duty to help those they knew personally. However, in a larger society, known as the Great or Open Society, interactions extend beyond familiar people to strangers and foreigners. This shift means that the rules of justice must also apply to these unknown individuals. While a liberal society aims to treat everyone with the same respect and fairness, this often means simplifying the obligations one has toward others.
In small communities, people have a clear understanding of each other's contributions and needs, which facilitates a sense of moral obligation. However, in larger societies, these personal connections are lost, making it difficult to determine what constitutes 'social justice' on a broader scale. This leads to challenges when people advocate for justice nationally while failing to extend that same concern to foreigners or those outside their immediate group.
Moreover, the effectiveness of national policies on justice often overlooks the complexities of international relationships and humanitarian needs. As the rules for justice broaden, they necessitate a simplification of duties owed to those in smaller groups. The principles that can be generalized for interaction in a larger society must be less specific than those for close-knit communities.
Ultimately, while striving for fairness in the Open Society promotes equality, it can dilute the strong moral obligations individuals feel toward those they know personally. This reflects a shift from instinctive actions based on familiarity to rational principles of justice that apply universally. The challenge remains in balancing these evolving moral standards while recognizing the limitations imposed by expanding social networks.