Too little
Convenience alone: you choose the nearest station because the residents are not in the meeting.
Consider what is owed to those affected by your decisions beyond what they have the power to request.
Steady concern that people receive what is ethically due to them.
A decision’s effects extend beyond the people who can attend the meeting or influence its leader. Justice keeps their claims present when convenient agreement would leave them out.
Try a practice
You help plan a neighborhood evening event. The organizing group wants to put the returns station beside the nearest homes because it is easiest for the team. You bring the residents’ stated concern about late clattering into the plan and arrange a quieter return point farther from their windows. The trolley takes a longer trip. Convenience no longer has the only chair at the planning table.
The residents do not owe the group silent acceptance of every burden that makes the event easier to run. Justice asks what the undertaking owes those affected, including people with little leverage over its decisions. A fair outcome may require consultation, a changed arrangement or a cost borne by the organizers themselves.
A wider account of what is due can prevent a successful event from depending on an avoidable burden shifted to others. It also makes the purpose of consultation concrete: affected people’s claims can change the choice.
Convenience alone: you choose the nearest station because the residents are not in the meeting.
Just consideration: you assess their claim alongside the event’s needs and change the arrangement to reduce the avoidable burden.
Unbounded responsibility: you promise to remove every inconvenience of the event, including effects you cannot control, instead of making a defensible agreement.
A defensible arrangement gives affected people’s claims weight alongside the organizers’ needs, including when that adds effort.
Check who relies on a shared space before assigning it to your project.
Include people who bear a proposal’s cleanup or maintenance, not only those who receive its immediate benefit.
Fairness attends impartially to interests and evidence. Justice asks what those interests establish that people are ethically due.
Compassion responds to suffering. Justice can recognize a claim before someone has to suffer to make it visible.
Benevolent favor is a counterfeit of Justice when meeting an existing claim is presented as a gift that earns loyalty. Justice recognizes what is due without charging gratitude for it.
Consider a small shared arrangement you can influence. Identify an affected person whose needs have not been considered and check the relevant agreement or ask an appropriate question before proposing a change.
These pages offer ideas for reflection and character practice, not professional advice. Choose practices suited to your circumstances and abilities. You may adapt, pause, or skip an exercise; putting yourself or someone else at risk is not proof of virtue.
About these practicesSeven selections to return to through the week. Follow a source link to read the surrounding passage.
This virtue is justice: the violation of justice is injury: it does real and positive hurt to some particular persons, from motives which are naturally disapproved of.
Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments
SECTION II. Of justice and beneficence.; CHAP. I. Comparison of those two virtues.
Smith defines the breach of justice through the injury to a particular person. An organizer’s convenience must be weighed against the actual burden imposed.
Therefore, justice combined with practical wisdom will command all the confidence we can desire; justice without wisdom will be able to do much; wisdom without justice will be of no avail at all.
Marcus Tullius Cicero, De Officiis
BOOK II EXPEDIENCY; section 34
Cicero refuses to treat practical cleverness as sufficient without justice. An efficient arrangement still needs an account of what people are due.
For they secure one sort of justice, to be sure, in that they do no positive wrong to anyone, but they fall into the opposite injustice; for hampered by their pursuit of learning they leave to their fate those whom they ought to defend.
Marcus Tullius Cicero, De Officiis
BOOK I MORAL GOODNESS; section 28
Cicero distinguishes doing no direct wrong from neglecting someone one ought to defend. Absence from the meeting does not cancel an affected person’s claim.
Others again who say that regard should be had for the rights of fellow-citizens, but not of foreigners, would destroy the universal brotherhood of mankind; and when this is annihilated, kindness, generosity, goodness, and justice must utterly perish; and those who work all this destruction must be considered as wickedly rebelling against the immortal gods.
Marcus Tullius Cicero, De Officiis
BOOK III THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE RIGHT AND THE EXPEDIENT; section 27
Cicero extends consideration beyond fellow citizens. The undertaking’s members are not the only people whose interests belong in its decision.
To be held to rigid rules of justice for the sake of others, develops the feelings and capacities which have the good of others for their object.
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty
CHAPTER III. OF INDIVIDUALITY, AS ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF WELL-BEING.
Mill connects just limits with developing regard for others. Honoring a claim can be part of learning to lead, not merely an obstacle to the plan.
In the unceasing ebb and flow of justice and oppression we must all dig channels as best we may, that at the propitious moment somewhat of the swelling tide may be conducted to the barren places of life.
Jane Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House
CHAPTER II; INFLUENCE OF LINCOLN
Addams describes work that gives justice a practical channel. The change to a return point is a small arrangement through which consideration becomes effective.
Why cowards are cruel may be easily discovered; but for what reason, not more infamous than cowardice, can that man delight in oppression who has nothing to fear?
Samuel Johnson, The Works of Samuel Johnson, Volume III: The Rambler
The Rambler, No. 148
Johnson challenges oppression by those who have nothing to fear. Power over a decision gives no reason to make others bear needless costs.
Choose this approved collection as an optional workbook program, or select individual virtues in My Virtues.