按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
law as to its ideals。 We oppose a right that ought to be … as the
just … to the positive law； judge the latter by the former； and
call actual law unjust in so far as it does not correspond to
this ideal。 The conceptions which guide us herein； and from which
we derive our idea of the just； are by no means simple； on the
one hand the peculiar nature of legal prescriptions； being
certain formal rules of social intercourse； and on the other the
ideal aims of social life which determine the material contents
of law； combine to create this ideal。 Conceptions of the perfect
commonwealth and of the perfect individual are associated in it。
When we speak of what is just in a narrower sense； when we use
the word not as it is used in schools； but in the daily usage of
common speech； we consider only one of these conceptions； or
better； only one of these co…operating spheres of conception。
When we speak of a just judge； a just punishment； or just
institutions； we usually conceive of a society； a number of
people； a comparison of them； and a fair distribution of good and
of bad； of that which causes pain and pleasure； measured by
uniform objective standards。 The specific conception of justice；
the one which principally interests us here； is that of justice
in distribution； it always presupposes the proportionality of two
opposite quantities； one of human beings and one of goods which
are to be distributed。 We necessarily classify in series；
according to objective characteristics； every multiplicity of
persons which appears to us in some respect as a unity； and the
ideal conception of what ought to be； demands the distribution of
goods and evils according to this classification。 By this
standard our ideal always measures reality。 Our moral judgment is
always active in estimating the actions of men； their vices as
well as their virtues and their achievements that is in comparing
and classifying them。 Our social instinct is ever active in
fixing the relation of the individual and his doings to the whole
of the community； of the State and of humanity； in measuring and
locating them accordingly。 With relentless necessity the
conviction always governs us that this classification must
determine the distribution of honors and political influence； of
position； of incomes and punishments。 The similar should be
treated alike； the dissimilar unlike。 It is a reciprocity of
human actions which we demand。 The maintenance of reciprocity
appears just； its disregard unjust。 In an unjust proportion one
part obtains too much； the other too little。 The unjust usurps
too much of the good to be distributed； the unjustly suffering
receives too little。
We call an election system just which distributes political
influence according to individual ability and merit in state and
community。 We call a penal code just which； in spite of the
manifold variety of misdemeanors and crimes； in spite of the
seeming incomparability of the different punishments； has found a
uniformly weighing system which parallels offences and
punishments in accordance with public sentiment。 We speak of a
just gradation of salaries； of a just promotion of officers in
every stock company； in every railroad； as well as in the army；
and in the hierarchy of State officials。 We speak of a just
distribution of taxes； of a just gradation of wages； of just
profits； of a just interest on loans。 And always there is the
same conception in the background： men are grouped and classified
according to certain characteristics； qualities； deeds and
accomplishments； descent and prosperity。 Burdens and advantages
should correspond to these classes。
The profit of an undertaking is said to be justly higher than
the rate of interest； because a greater risk and an indemnity for
labor are therein involved； both of which are foreign to
interest。 Interest on capital is just because the lender foregoes
a possible profit or enjoyment； because the borrower is in a much
worse position without this aid； and because for the service of
the one a consideration from the other seems just。 The high
earnings of the well…known physician or lawyer are just； such is
Adam Smith's argument； because of the large number who go to
great expense in their studies； many have very small incomes； the
chosen； able ones are thus in a manner compensated therefor。
Every house…wife； every servant girl； daily and hourly thinks
this price and that unjust； and this always on the ground of
comparisons； classifications and valuations。 Most important；
however； is the judgment of the justice or injustice of the
condition of social classes in general。
Aristotle calls slavery just when master and slave are by
nature as different as soul and body； as governing will and
external instrument。 Then； he says； it is a natural；
intrinsically justified slavery； the external legal relation of
society corresponds to human nature。 Exactly the same can be said
of all social gradations and classifications。 We feel them to be
just as far as we find them in accord with our observations of
similar or dissimilar qualities of the classes in question。 The
public mind has never； apart from times of error and excitement；
begrudged honor； riches and position to those whose actions；
whose abilities correspondingly excelled。 It found fault with the
condition of the middle and lower classes whenever it observed
that men of the same race； the same creed； the same community；
were maltreated by their equals and were held in a subjection not
corresponding to their education and merit。 All class struggles
of the past have arisen from these sentiments。 The greatest
politicians and popular leaders of all times； as well as the
greatest kings and Caesars； placed themselves at the head of
movements which； originating in oppressed； abused and maltreated
classes； aspired； successfully or otherwise； to a removal of
unjust social conditions。 These class…struggles have often been
only for political rights； for honors； or for marriage rights。
The essential element； however； was always an economic question；
the distribution of incomes and wealth or the conditions and
avenues to them； the possibilities of acquisition； for in the
social struggle for life； economic existence is the most
important factor。
And therefore the question always arises here also； whether
that which is； is just。 Is this restriction of trade； this or
that institution touching the distribution of wealth； is this
entire distribution of incomes just？
This question； indeed； is not always equally emphasized； the
feelings which spring from the answer do not at all times equally
influence the masses and single parties。 The judgment； that a
certain classification and distribution of incomes is just or
unjust； is of course not the only one that is given about the
social phenomenon in question。 Nor is this judgment； even though
thousands are agreed upon it； the only power which rules the
distribution of incomes。 But this judgment is the only
psychological basis from which all demands for the right of
equality have arisen。 It is the basis of all individualism。 From
the standpoint of mankind there may be other