BOOK REVIEW: On the Priority of Justice. LIBERALISM AND THE LIMITS OF JUSTICE. By Michael J. Sandel + Skip over navigation
LexisNexis® Browse Law Reviews and Treatises
Skip over navigation
Sign in with your lexis.com® ID to access the full text of this article.
-OR-
Order the full text of this article if you do not have a lexis.com® ID.
 
Price: 
US $22.00 (+ tax)
 
 

Copyright (c) 1985 Texas Law Review
Texas Law Review

BOOK REVIEW: On the Priority of Justice.

LIBERALISM AND THE LIMITS OF JUSTICE. By Michael J. Sandel +

New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Pp. ix, 191. $ 29.50. ++



+ Assistant Professor of Government, Harvard University.


++ Hereinafter cited by page number only.

May, 1985

63 Tex. L. Rev. 1569

Author

Reviewed by William Powers *

Excerpt

I. Introduction

Michael Sandel's Liberalism and the Limits of Justice is a critique of a particular approach to moral and political philosophy that he calls "deontological liberalism." Deontological liberalism is a position associated with the works of Immanuel Kant and John Rawls, and Rawls' major book, A Theory of Justice, 1 is the primary focus of Sandel's analysis.

An understanding of Sandel's critique of Rawls requires an understanding of deontological liberalism, and this in turn requires an understanding of another basic approach to the question of what makes a society just or good, namely, utilitarianism. According to utilitarianism, of all the acts that a person can perform, the right act is the one that produces the greatest amount of happiness among human beings, counting everyone equally, and taking into account long-range as well as short-range consequences of actions. 2 In this sense, utilitarianism is a particular version of consequentialism, the view that the moral propriety of an act is judged in terms of its consequences. Consequentialist theories differ among themselves according to their differing views about what constitutes good consequences. Utilitarianism, the most prominent among consequentialist theories, asserts that human happiness defines what is good.

A standard objection to consequentialism, however, is that it cannot account for our strongly held beliefs about rights and justice. Opponents of utilitarianism argue that some acts are unjust, regardless of their consequences, because they violate rights. For example, a completely consistent utilitarian judge who knows a defendant is ...
 
 
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.
Search Documents
 
eg., Environmental Insurance Coverage Under the Comprehensive General Liability Policy
 
 
 
 

Lexis® Web - The only search engine that delivers free web content specifically from legal sites validated by LexisNexis® attorney editors and includes tools for faster research and more relevant results.

 
LexisNexis Store
Research Now - Go to lexis.com
Connect the Dots - Free 1 hour webcast
Share. Network. Discover. - Go to LexisNexis Communities