Spheres of Justice¶
Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. Basic Books.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Equity
- Rule / standard principle ↔ algorithm / policy / protocol / standard procedure / standing order, a domain-mapping pattern Walzer (1983) develops in his account of justice as differing across distinct social spheres.
This sourceArgues different social goods belong to distinct spheres governed by distinct distributive criteria internal to their social meanings ('complex equality').
- Rule / standard principle ↔ algorithm / policy / protocol / standard procedure / standing order, a domain-mapping pattern Walzer (1983) develops in his account of justice as differing across distinct social spheres.
- Fairness
- The clarity fairness provides includes recognizing that fairness judgments are situated and contestable: what counts as comparable circumstance, what features are relevant, and which principle applies depend on implicit frameworks (meritocracy vs. need-based distribution, individual vs. collective responsibility, historical vs. forward-looking remedy), a "spheres of justice" pluralism Walzer (1983) develops by arguing that different social goods properly fall under different distributive criteria.
This sourceArgues different social goods (money, office, education, recognition) belong to distinct spheres governed by distinct distributive criteria internal to their social meanings ('complex equality'), so no single principle applies across spheres.
- The clarity fairness provides includes recognizing that fairness judgments are situated and contestable: what counts as comparable circumstance, what features are relevant, and which principle applies depend on implicit frameworks (meritocracy vs. need-based distribution, individual vs. collective responsibility, historical vs. forward-looking remedy), a "spheres of justice" pluralism Walzer (1983) develops by arguing that different social goods properly fall under different distributive criteria.
- Taboo
- The taboo-status removes entire classes of actions from the negotiation space, allowing societies to organize themselves without having to defend every boundary at every moment
This sourceArgues for a pluralist account of fairness in which different social goods (money, office, education, recognition) are governed by distinct distributive criteria internal to their social meanings; canonical source for situated, contestable fairness.
- The taboo-status removes entire classes of actions from the negotiation space, allowing societies to organize themselves without having to defend every boundary at every moment
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:2b67b84b3fbc · see in the full table