Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?

4.18 of 5 stars 4.18 · rating details · 2,759 ratings · 370 reviews

What are our obligations to others as people in a free society? Should government tax the rich to help the poor? Is the free market fair? Is it sometimes wrong to tell the truth? Is killing sometimes morally required? Is it possible, or desirable, to legislate morality? Do individual rights and the common good conflict?

Michael J. Sandel’s “Justice” course is one of the mo

...more

Hardcover, 308 pages

Published September 15th 2009 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux (first published 2009)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson

The Constitution of the United States of America by James Madison

President Obama's Summer Reading List

49th out of 262 books — 125 voters

The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell

The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera

The Consolations of Philosophy by Alain de Botton

A History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell

Best Accessible Philosophy Books

21st out of 43 books — 33 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Apr 10, 2011 Peter rated it 5 of 5 stars

"He who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god."

This quote from Aristotle's Politics was new to me. It was one of many highlights in this book.

Sandel's "Justice" is organized in a very interesting way. He starts with utilitarian, then libertarian political philosophy. You might assume he's following a sequence of conservative (less sophisticated) to liberal (more sophisticated). And then, surprise, he throws three c...more

10 likes · like · see review

Oct 15, 2012 Rizky Akita rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, politics-and-philosophy, owned-books

If you think "Justice" and "Philosophy" are things you don't really care about or something you consider as 'way too complicated to learn about', then I recommend you to pick this book and add it into your personal bookshelves. I bought this book due to my passion on debating and I thought this book will improve my speech quality. It turned out, Michael J. Sandel fulfills my expectation.Nay, he exceeded my expectation.

Here's my review :

1. Sandel gives a comprehensive overview toward all basic ph...more

3 likes · like · see review

Oct 16, 2012 Cheryl rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites, morality, philosophy

Michael Sandel is a political professor at Harvard and the author of JUSTICE: WHAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO? After more than two decades of teaching one of the most popular courses in the college's history with more than 15,000 students attending, Sandel wrote the book based on his notes. The conversation begins...

There is an exhilaration with studying philosophy, but it has its dangers. The familiar in life becomes strange, as we reflect on our circumstances. It has a personal risk, because it i...more

6 likes · like · see review

Jun 12, 2012 Jon rated it 4 of 5 stars

First I should say right at the beginning that the title is a bit misleading: I don't think there is a single issue in which Sandel tells us explicitly the right thing to do. But he does give what seems to me a very clear description of various ways of thinking about justice. He examines utilitarianism (greatest good for the greatest number), then the absolute privileging of "freedom of choice"--both from the libertarian (largely economic) and from the liberal egalitarian views of Immanuel Kant...more First I should say right at the beginning that the title is a bit misleading: I don't think there is a single issue in which Sandel tells us explicitly the right thing to do. But he does give what seems to me a very clear description of various ways of thinking about justice. He examines utilitarianism (greatest good for the greatest number), then the absolute privileging of "freedom of choice"--both from the libertarian (largely economic) and from the liberal egalitarian views of Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. He explains what the arguments are for and against each of these views. He then moves on to Aristotle, the only philosopher he discusses who makes defining the good life basic to understanding what is just. And finally he reveals his own modified Aristotelianism (apparently, and unfortunately, called "communitarianism"),which tries to take a sense of shared community into account for answering vexing questions about immigration, same-sex marriage, income redistribution, and the like. He quotes JFK's speech explaining how his Catholicism would not affect his exercise of power, and he finds it a bit naive. He also quotes Obama's two speeches on the same subject and finds them much better at accurately defining the problem without actually promising specific decisions. He then--to my surprise--cites Robert F. Kennedy (the last politician about whom I was truly excited) for what he considers the proper injection of morality and community spirit into public life. He quotes a speech RFK made in 1968, three months before his assassination, and I can't resist copying it here, even though it's long.

"Our Gross National Product is now over 800 billion dollars a year. But that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts...the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the Gross National Product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud to be Americans."

Wow. He can still get my heart going. The quote provides a segue into Sandel's next book (What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets). He summarizes what will become that book in one page here. The present book is the better of the two.

(less)

1 like · like · see review

Oct 24, 2012 Paul rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Anyone who cares about how the idea/word of "justice" is applied.

Shelves: social-justice

I'll make this short and simple: if you care anything about how justice is administered in your country, whatever country that may be, and how the notions of justice are mixed with other areas of life such as politics, markets, civic virtue, citizenship, and so on, then you need to read this book.

It's not a book that has any kind of earthshaking, groundbreaking reveals, nor does it go on to utterly refute one philosophy over another in a dazzling display of deft thought and astute, incisive rea...more

2 likes · like · see review

Feb 06, 2013 Peter Fortune rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: miscellaneous

Michael Sandel is a profeesor of political philosophy at Harvard University. This book is an outgrowth of his 1,000+ student course (available on DVD and very worth it). Sandel's mastery at managing active student debate is marvelous to see, but regrettably not possible in the book.

Sandel starts by posing some simple but intriguing moral questions. He then proceeds to address these using the tools of the great philosophers. Aristotle represents the Teleological Perspective--a thing is properly u...more

like · see review

Jan 05, 2013 David rated it 3 of 5 stars

worth the read, but not everyone will understands this practical book on aspects of abortion, affirmative actions, military draft, stemcells, saving lives during critical choices or situations...i do admit this book carries quite heavy notions of neo liberalistic point of view in which i do not condone of..yet author is quite intelligent to throw a platform of Aristotle, Socrates, Plato's virtue, truth as essential fundation in order to understand perhaps Kant, Mill, Hayak, etc.. if one does not...more

like · see review

Sep 26, 2012 Martin Cohen rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy

The book does a good job of outlining the basic philosophical ideas of justice. Sandel makes good use of contemporary and historical choices that people have made to enliven the discussion and to relate it to the reader. The book follows an historical development, covering the utilitarians, Kant and Rawls. He breaks the historical flow to introduce Aristotle at the end. He does this to present his own view of justice. Sandel argues that, as opposed to the utilitarians and Kantians, our view of j...more

1 like · like · see review

Sep 13, 2012 Jessie Young rated it 3 of 5 stars

I only read a few chapters of this book because it was Kindle loaned to be and those only last 2 weeks. But, I thought the part of this book that I did read was very thought provoking. Pretty dry, but a good overview of the philosophy of justice. He gives strong arguments on both sides of every debate, which I appreciate.

Highlights:

Proponents of price-gouging laws argue that any estimate of the general welfare must include the pain and suffering of those who may be priced out of basic necessitie...more

like · see review

Jul 08, 2012 Jayaprakash Satyamurthy rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I live in a country where the head of state seems to think that his duties to the people he governs are restricted to ensuring that they have the chance to become as prosperous as possible, this being the highest good he can provide them (nevermind the fact that his modus operandi for doing so is deeply flawed- he seeks to enable the very wealthy to become even more wealthy claiming that this 'increases the size of the cake' and hence the size of everyone's slice - a piece of sophism that has di...more I live in a country where the head of state seems to think that his duties to the people he governs are restricted to ensuring that they have the chance to become as prosperous as possible, this being the highest good he can provide them (nevermind the fact that his modus operandi for doing so is deeply flawed- he seeks to enable the very wealthy to become even more wealthy claiming that this 'increases the size of the cake' and hence the size of everyone's slice - a piece of sophism that has disproved itself countless times as impecunious farmers and failed engineering students end their own lives, convinced that the system offers them no other recourse). All questions of moral or ethical right and wrong are monopolised by a religious right that seeks to saffronise all walks of life while pursuing pretty much the same goals of enabling the pursuit of happiness-as-wealth. Individual liberties and freedoms are low on the agenda of either political group, especially when they clash with developmental exigencies or traditional values.

So it's a somewhat different set-up from the American one against which Sandel contextualises his analysis of differing approaches to justice, but it has similar elements, notably the choice between privileging market dynamics over ethics or ceding all ethical authority to a religious tradition. Sandel argues that utilitarian, liberal and libertarian notions of social justice have all fallen short; they ignore the fact that justice implies judgement, and that these judgements have to be made on the basis of an ethical position. By emphasising on the production of value or the protection of freedom no matter what, we tacitly imply that ethics and morality have no place in reasoned public discourse. This creates situations where financial greed masquerades as public good or where fundamentalist rabble-rousing occupies the moral vacuum left by the liberal refusal to bring questions of virtue into political parlance.

Sandel proposes a more rigorous approach to justice and citizenship - one where every citizen is involved in activities that build their sense of belonging to a community and holding civic duties in addition to rights and freedoms. He suggests that when we focus on enabling prosperity are flattening our conception of the good life to a single parameter - financial wealth - and by focussing solely on individual freedom we are ingnoring the complex and vital ethical debates at play in numerous issues. He does not offer a solution to anything, but a suggestion that justice and a society's notion of what is right should be matters of debate and discussion in which the ethical dimension is openly addressed. The decision of what might be the right thing to do in any given situation might be hard to arrive at, or even impossible at times, but he argues that an engaged civic body that attempts to constantly evolve its own cherished version of the good life is in a better position than one that allows profit, unqualified individualism or the denial of moral imperatives to take precedence.

I found this book excellent, a great corrective to the seductive simplicity of the utilitarian and libertarian rhetoric that I've often been swayed by and a stirring call to a more demanding, engaged notion of what it means to be a member of a society. (less)

3 likes · like · see review

Apr 30, 2012 Ron rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

I am no student of moral philosophy, and this is the first book I've read from start to finish on the subject, so my opinion about it is limited. What I can say is that I found it illuminating, engaging, and even at times entertaining (the proposed admission letters to prospective college freshmen had me laughing out loud). What Sandel taught me is that while I've thrown around words like "utilitarianism," "libertarianism," "ethics," even "justice," I have used them imprecisely and with hardly a...more

1 like · like · see review

Nov 11, 2011 David rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Detailed discussion of lofty ideas about justice (utilitarianism, Kant's categorical imperative, Rawls' concept of reasoning from the "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" about what position you personally will hold in the society you are building, MacIntyre's communitarian views expressed in the book After Virtue, and so on) applied to contemporary topics (affirmative action, stem cell research, etc. etc. etc.).

Lively writing, incisive analyses, even-handed consideration of alternat...more

like · see review

Sep 30, 2011 Jorge rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy-ethics

Justice: What’s The Right Thing to Do? By Michael J. Sandel

“Justice: What’s The Right Thing to Do?” is a fascinating book about practical justice. Harvard law professor Michael Sandel takes his very popular class to the public and hits upon the most fascinating and controversial topics in an even-handed approach. This excellent 320-page book is broken out in the following ten chapters: 1. Doing the Right Thing, 2. The Greatest Happiness Principle/Utilitarianism, 3. Do We Own Ourselves?/Libertari...more

2 likes · like · see review

May 30, 2011 Steve rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: kindle, law, non-fiction, philosophy, reference

Smartly written and easy to read, this book is Sandel's writeup of his legendary Harvard course on Ethics and Justice. I first watched the course online (iTunes) and wanted to read the book.

Both are excellent -- entertaining and enlightening. I can't recommend them more highly.

The book uses real life cases, major ethical "rocks" (abortion, selling human organs, ..) and hypotheticals (e.g. trolley car problems) to elucidate and clarify the totally of Western theoretical philosophy of political e...more

3 likes · like · see review

Mar 25, 2011 Aaron Choi rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: politics, philosophy

A very thought-provoking read. Sandel begins with a basic survey of utilitarianism, liberterianism, and some of the philosophers -- ancient and contemporary -- who espoused various theories of justice. The book gathers momentum as it approaches the end when Sandel begins tying the concepts together and emerging with a statement of his own view. Pointing out the deficiencies of justice systems based solely on maximizing utility or preserving individual freedom, Sandel's take is a breath of fresh...more

1 like · like · see review

Feb 06, 2011 Mark rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

OK, to be up front, I didn't actually read this book; I watched the 12 hour video podcast of this Harvard Class that I got from iTunesU. The unabridged audiobook is 11 hours and 1 minute, so I figure, "close enough." That having been said, I really enjoyed this experience on two levels: First, the subject matter is a review (by way of discussion) of moral and political philosophy, referencing the great moral philosophers. Sandel starts out with basic tenets and builds into fairly complex issues...more

1 like · like · see review

Jessica I love the Justice course from Harvard. Sandel is an incredible teacher! It is difficult to tell what he thinks as a teacher but does a great job of d...more
Feb 07, 2011 08:45am

Mark Hi Jessica! Two scriptures I read this morning apply here. Paul, speaking of latter-day apostasy, says, (2 Tim 3:5&7), "Having a form of godliness...more
updated Feb 07, 2011 09:17am

Jessica Well said and so true! I love the gospel for its simpleness and clarity. I think you should start an institute book club where we can seek out of the...more
Feb 07, 2011 09:31am

Aug 12, 2010 The Book Nazi rated it 5 of 5 stars

Amidst all this recession and economic downturns experienced in G8 countries..Michael J. Sandel makes sense. He believes that markets if left to themselves or encouraged to spread too far, can injure basic moral values and short change the common good.

From the things I've heard on the Intenet, This Harvard Lecturers introductory course on justice is a hot ticket on the campus. Now readers get to read his arguments in a book form and I have no doubt that this book would appeal to anyone who like...more Amidst all this recession and economic downturns experienced in G8 countries..Michael J. Sandel makes sense. He believes that markets if left to themselves or encouraged to spread too far, can injure basic moral values and short change the common good.

From the things I've heard on the Intenet, This Harvard Lecturers introductory course on justice is a hot ticket on the campus. Now readers get to read his arguments in a book form and I have no doubt that this book would appeal to anyone who like to argue political rights and wrongs, but is not up on the lore and language of contemporary philosophy.

Mr Sandel brings abstruse sounding ethical dilemmas down to earth with vivid examples taken from the news: ex, price gouging in New Orleans after Katrina, Affirmative action programmes at American universities, large bank bonuses paid with tax-payers money.. Are such practices ethical? If so, Why?

Is it ever right to kill one innocent person to save lives of several others?- With a horrifying dilemma from Afghanistan in 2005. A four man American unit on reconnaissance behind lines stumbled on a shepherd likely, if let go to betray them to Taliban. They could not hold him prisoner. Nor, on moral grounds, would the service men in charge kill him. Released the shepherd alerted the Taliban, who surrounded the unit. Three were killed along with 16 Americans in a rescue helicopter. The soldier in command, who lived, called his decision ''Stupid,lame, left brained and southern-fried. Which was right, his earlier refusal or his later regret ?

In each case examined, Sandel gently prods readers to check their gut reactions of right and wrong against three philosophical views. To Utilitarians such as Jeremy Bentham and J.S Mill, the right action is roughly speaking whatever most promotes human well-being. Kantians stress individual rights and not using others as means to your ends. And Aristotalians emphasise virtues of and intrinsic values that make for worthwhile lives..

People who have a knack for will surely cherish this book :)(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Jun 11, 2010 Evanston Public Library added it

A provocative inquiry into the intellectual balancing act of all significant decision-making. In the public sphere, how should we weigh liberty versus equality? Should we try to legislate morality? In private life, when might it be ethical to lie? Or to kill? Do the same standards apply to killing as public policy?

Consider just one of Sandel's many clever morality tales. When hurricanes rip Florida and knock out power, is it wrong for gas stations to jack up the price of ice? (And is it okay for...more

like · see review

Dec 24, 2009 Jon Edward rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: public_policy

When most people hear the term "justice" they probably bring to mind "criminal justice." However, the vast majority of concerns over right and wrong are economic. Few of us are criminals, but everyone needs to eat. How does money get distributed and what do people from various schools of thought have to say about it? Libertarians see no obligatory relationships apart from contractual ones; utilitarians advocate the most good for the most number; 20th century American thinker John Rawls suggests...more

like · see review

Nov 27, 2009 Billie Pritchett rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites

Michael Sandel's Justice reviews four conceptions of justice and advocates one of these conceptions. The first conception (utilitarian) is justice as maximizing the greatest amount of pleasure for the greatest number of people. The second conception (libertarian) of justice is based on the idea of self-ownership and complete entitlement to the products of one's labor. The third conception (liberal) is justice as arriving from impartial principles or an impartial position and is largely concerned...more Michael Sandel's Justice reviews four conceptions of justice and advocates one of these conceptions. The first conception (utilitarian) is justice as maximizing the greatest amount of pleasure for the greatest number of people. The second conception (libertarian) of justice is based on the idea of self-ownership and complete entitlement to the products of one's labor. The third conception (liberal) is justice as arriving from impartial principles or an impartial position and is largely concerned with the distribution of wealth and opportunity that would arise from either these principles or this position. The fourth conception (perfectionist) is justice as giving people what they deserve in accordance with the purposes of certain institutions and the appropriate bestowal of honor and recognition vis-a-vis public roles. Sandel advocates the fourth conception. My only criticism of the book is that he fails to recognize the possibility that the third and fourth conception do not have to be as neatly delineated as he believes they are. Here is an example. A person is drafted to fight in a war she thinks is unjust. In accordance with her position as a citizen of a certain country, she thinks that one should honor one's country and one's position as a citizen. Being a citizen of this country is, after all, a part of her identity. But what she feels makes this war unjust is that also part of her identity is this cosmopolitan sensibility, and she believes that there is nothing more at moral stake in the coming war than the promotion of these fiat boundaries folk call countries. This would be a case where the war is unjust on her account from both an impartial principle or position (as in the third conception) and from the sense that this war is not appropriately honoring fellow human beings (as in the fourth conception). In that case, the third and fourth conception at least do not have to have the boundaries he thinks they do. Maybe he would concede that point. What gives, Sandel? Good book.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Nov 21, 2009 Chris rated it 3 of 5 stars

A concise, accessible overview of political philosophy, with utilitarianism, libertarianism and a promoting-virtue perspective. Makes the case that by trying to use abstract principles like fairness, liberals created a void that cultural conservatives entered with emotionally compelling and intuitively compelling arguments.

An example is abortion: people, even with great educations, aren't always going to get emotionally involved in "choice" or women's rights generally. The real debate is when li...more

like · see review

Sep 28, 2012 Meepspeeps rated it 4 of 5 stars

I found many interesting arguments in this book. One conclusion the author helped me reach is about loyalty. Peeps are loyal to sports teams, to their country (aka patriotic), and to family. This loyalty leads to greater shared experience and community. Greater shared experience and community makes peeps more likely to act justly and seek just public policy. p. 199 "We can sit on the sidelines and wonder what policies we would favor if we had to decide. But this is not the same as sharing in sig...more

like · see review

Jul 12, 2010 Todd rated it 5 of 5 stars

"Justice" is the distillation of the introductory ethics course that Michael Sandel has been teaching for years. You can check out justiceharvard.org to see video lectures covering many of the same topics covered in "Justice". While the book gives Sandel a bit more space to go into some details not offered in these videos, the two formats are nearly identical.

When it comes to ethics and modern example of ethical theories in action, I'm not sure I've read anyone with a clearer presentation than...more

2 likes · like · see review

Apr 25, 2013 Crosscurrents rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2012-13

Editorial Reviews

“Sandel explains theories of justice . . . with clarity and immediacy; the ideas of Aristotle, Jeremy Bentham, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Robert Nozick and John Rawls have rarely, if ever, been set out as accessibly . . . In terms we can all understand, Justice confronts us with the concepts that lurk, so often unacknowledged, beneath our conflicts.” —Jonathan Rauch, The New York Times

"Harvard government professor Sandel (Public Philosophy) dazzles in this sweeping survey...more

like · see review

Jan 05, 2010 Ellin rated it 4 of 5 stars

The author is Professor of Government at Harvard University and the book jacket says his course, "Justice", "is one of the most popular and influential at Harvard. Up to a thousand students pack the campus theater to hear Sandel relate the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day, and this fall, public television will air a series based on the course." I read this book faster than I should have because I needed to return it to the library but it's the kind of bo...more

like · see review

Feb 04, 2013 Erik Lee rated it 5 of 5 stars

A popular treatise on moral theory, Sandel does justice to writing a primer on what popular philosophy is all about.

In a great service to the prevailing modern ignorance (ie Hipsterism) that gawks at anything intellectual and established, Sandel brings home the philosophical dilemmas confronting us daily.

Much of the book, if not its entirety, is based off of his immensely popular Harvard lectures (available online). Sandel is a masterful orator and leaves the reader/audience gasping for what p...more

like · see review

Dec 20, 2009 Emily rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, meridian

An accessible introduction to several major schools of philosophy and philosophers including utilitarianism, libertarianism, Immanuel Kant, John Rawls, and Aristotle, among others. But just because it's accessible, doesn't mean it's necessarily easy reading. There are deep concepts here that take a while to digest; don't pick this one up looking for a quick read.

Michael Sandel methodically and thoroughly discusses each approach to the concept of justice, defining it, elucidating with examples, p...more

1 like · like · see review

Jun 12, 2011 Cherry rated it 5 of 5 stars

People may say that this book is beyond my years of learning, since I'm only 17 years old. I do have to admit, I took down this book for several days and then back to reading it again.

So why did I continue reading?
I'm in love with the facts, that's it. And this book doesn't just explain about justice, it explains what people should do. Justice has many different forms in other cultures. And Michael, I think, defines it as a moral conscience that people has and what it'll do for others. My curios...more

2 likes · like · see review

Feb 24, 2012 Matt rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, favorites

I picked this up on a recommendation from Massimo Pigliucci's blog, and what an excellent choice. Sandel covers the three main avenues of determining what's right: consequentialism, starting from Bentham and Mill's utilitarianism; freedom-based theories including libertarianism and Kant's categorical imperative; and the virtue ethics of Aristotle. Sandel introduces each in turn, discussing what they are and what they imply about justice.

In this context, "justice" refers not simply to courts and...more

1 like · like · see review

Oct 20, 2009 David Lundqvist rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Those looking for ideas

Recommended to David by: The Economist

Shelves: philosophy

Michael J. Sandel's Justice offers a refreshingly different look into the world of moral philosophy. It analyses the philosophical positions of Utilitarianism, Teleological thinking, Libertarianism and Liberal Egalitarianism in reference to justice. The analysis is done through a series of moral dilemmas many entertaining and they are sure to divide readers. The book is well written and the explanations of the theories are fantastic and simple to understand. This is a book created with accessibi...more Michael J. Sandel's Justice offers a refreshingly different look into the world of moral philosophy. It analyses the philosophical positions of Utilitarianism, Teleological thinking, Libertarianism and Liberal Egalitarianism in reference to justice. The analysis is done through a series of moral dilemmas many entertaining and they are sure to divide readers. The book is well written and the explanations of the theories are fantastic and simple to understand. This is a book created with accessibility in mind. As I began my journey into this book I began to wonder if maybe nothing new would be presented apart from the odd moral quandary, after all I have read a great deal into the subject and the different ideas covered can be found in a multitude of other places. I'm happy to say that my worries were misplaced.

First: Unlike other book of this kind, Justice is written with a non-judgemental attitude. Each theory is laid out and its possible flaws identified, but then Sandel simply asks if you could accept them. He recognises that morality is not something we all readily agree on and even goes as far as presenting real world examples of where people employed this or that theory to justify their actions.

Second: To say that is non-judgemental does not mean that Sandel does not offer his own view. Throughout the book he relates why he could not accept each particular theory. The last chapter is a fuller account of his outlook. In this he readily admits that his ideas are at odds with those of the wider society as a whole, few people are able to voice this with such humility. His view is admirably pluralistic, taking the best bits from each theory and combining them into an idea that is attractive but which I and most people cannot fully accept. For me it lacked cohesion, but I was stirred into assimilating parts of his theory into my own reasoning.

Third: Sandel's method is intelligent debate in an effort to convince you of his views. He does not try to tell you that he is right and attempt to rip apart other theories that people feel more comfortable with.

Justice was a book that I enjoyed reading, but I would not recommend this book to everybody. If you are looking for answers, this book provides none Sandel makes clear that we live in a pluralistic society where people are bound to disagree on some issues, there is as of yet no universal theory. Nor does the book provide a comprehensive look at the flaws of each theory. You will be required to think for yourself if you want to discover the killer flaw in each theory. Since he accepts parts of each one I doubt he believes one exists at all.

This is a book that should arouse much needed debate in the subject amongst the general population, which is something I readily welcome.
(less)

2 likes · like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Justice	1	19	Apr 28, 2012 05:05am

combine
Other Editions (23)

More editions...

Videos About This Book

Add a comment

Ep. 1 of "Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?"

1 comment

Genres

Philosophy

203 users

Non Fiction

126 users

Politics

49 users

Law

15 users

Sociology

12 users

History

10 users

Science

7 users

Politics > Political Science

7 users

Economics

6 users

Social

5 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Michael J. Sandel

Michael J. Sandel is the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government at Harvard University, where he has taught since 1980, and the author of many books. He lives in Brookline, Massachusetts.

http://us.macmillan.com/author/michae...

More about Michael J. Sandel...

Books by Michael J. Sandel

What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets

The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering

Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy

Public Philosophy: Essays on Morality in Politics

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Gerechtigkeit: Wi...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Justice: What's the Ri...

“Markets are useful instruments for organizing productive activity. But unless we want to let the market rewrite the norms that govern social institutions, we need a public debate about the moral limits of markets.” — 5 people liked it

“If the spirit of their intercourse were still the same after their coming together as it had been when they were living apart,' Aristotle writes, their association can't really be considered a polis, or political community.
'A polis is not an association for residence on a common site, or for the sake of preventing mutual injustice and easing exchange.' While these conditions are necessary to a polis, they are not sufficient. 'The end and purpose of a polis is the good life, and the institutions of social life are means to that end.” — 1 person liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?
avg rating	preview: Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? Goodreads rating: 4.18 (2759 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6452731-justice?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1311982976l/6452731.jpg[/img][/url] [url=https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6452731-justice?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? by Michael J. Sandel[/url]

Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website