Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?
- Downloads：4839
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-04-07 11:56:18
- Update Date：2025-09-13
- Status：finish
- Author：Michael J. Sandel
- ISBN：0374532508
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
"For Michael Sandel， justice is not a spectator sport，" The Nation's reviewer of Justice remarked。 In his acclaimed book―based on his legendary Harvard course―Sandel offers a rare education in thinking through the complicated issues and controversies we face in public life today。 It has emerged as a most lucid and engaging guide for those who yearn for a more robust and thoughtful public discourse。 "In terms we can all understand，" wrote Jonathan Rauch in The New York Times， Justice "confronts us with the concepts that lurk 。 。 。 beneath our conflicts。"
Affirmative action， same-sex marriage， physician-assisted suicide， abortion， national service， the moral limits of markets―Sandel relates the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day， and shows how a surer grasp of philosophy can help us make sense of politics， morality， and our own convictions as well。
Justice is lively， thought-provoking， and wise―an essential new addition to the small shelf of books that speak convincingly to the hard questions of our civic life。
Affirmative action， same-sex marriage， physician-assisted suicide， abortion， national service， the moral limits of markets―Sandel relates the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day， and shows how a surer grasp of philosophy can help us make sense of politics， morality， and our own convictions as well。
Justice is lively， thought-provoking， and wise―an essential new addition to the small shelf of books that speak convincingly to the hard questions of our civic life。
Reviews
Navid Sheydaei
，
بیان عمیق‌ترین نظریات تاریخ اندیشه عدالت به روان‌ترین و جذاب‌ترین زبان ممکن
Denise
，
Though most of the examples Sandel brings up for consideration are well known and， dare I say it， absolutely overused， there was some interesting stuff here。 On the whole though this book just serve to drive home a fact I already knew: I don't have the patience for philosophy。 Though most of the examples Sandel brings up for consideration are well known and， dare I say it， absolutely overused， there was some interesting stuff here。 On the whole though this book just serve to drive home a fact I already knew: I don't have the patience for philosophy。 。。。more
Thuy Quynh
，
Bắt đầu bằng một study case rất căn bản của Triết học。 Tác giả dắt chúng ta qua từng khía cạnh của công lý và đạo đức bằng những trường hợp/triết lý cụ thể kèm những phản bác về chúng。 Cái hay của sách chính là đặt ra những vấn đề rất khó phân xử về mặt công lý lẫn đạo đức và liệu có thuyết học nào có thể cân bằng cả hai？Sách cho thấy góc nhìn về triết học chính trị mà Việt Nam ít có thể thấy được， góc nhìn của nước tư bản ấy 😂。
sepehrdad
，
خیلی آروم آروم خوندمش و خوشم اومد。 این که مثال‌های زیادی می‌زد خیلی خوب بود。 فصل جان رالزش برام مبهم بود。 آخر کتاب هم راستش باز نگرفتم که راه حلش چیه。 در مورد لزوم گفت‌وگو صحبت کرد。 خیلی آخرای کتاب رو سریع تموم کرد。 سوالی که برام به وجود اومد این بود که اون وقت با سلسله مراتب قدرت چه کار می‌خواد بکنه؟ با این چیزی که گفته بود اخلاق و عدالت نهایتا می‌رفت سمت همان بازی‌های قدرت که کی بالا قرار بگیره و کی پایین。البته حس کردم خودش هم وا مونده بود و راه حل خاصی نداشت و فقط برای این‌که راه‌حل‌های قبلی خیلی آروم آروم خوندمش و خوشم اومد。 این که مثال‌های زیادی می‌زد خیلی خوب بود。 فصل جان رالزش برام مبهم بود。 آخر کتاب هم راستش باز نگرفتم که راه حلش چیه。 در مورد لزوم گفت‌وگو صحبت کرد。 خیلی آخرای کتاب رو سریع تموم کرد。 سوالی که برام به وجود اومد این بود که اون وقت با سلسله مراتب قدرت چه کار می‌خواد بکنه؟ با این چیزی که گفته بود اخلاق و عدالت نهایتا می‌رفت سمت همان بازی‌های قدرت که کی بالا قرار بگیره و کی پایین。البته حس کردم خودش هم وا مونده بود و راه حل خاصی نداشت و فقط برای این‌که راه‌حل‌های قبلی رو نفی کنه یه چیزی گفت。ولی در مثال نقض آوردن خوب عمل کرده بود。 خوشم اومد。 。。。more
Alie
，
I was totally lost the entire time。 Yes， I have read this book for my Ethics class， but did I understand something？ There were approximately three words that made sense to me while reading Sandel’s book。 However， I will say that Justice and Philosophy are not my thing。 It’s not my language; I can’t understand it for one bit。 Yet， Sandel really gave his all to find explanations and examples and justifications， which is why I am giving this a 2/5。
Mohammadkazem
，
این کتاب یک خودآموز عالی درباره مفهوم عدالت هست。 تسلط زیاد نویسنده و قدرت نگارش‌اش از یک‌سو و ترجمه خوب آقای خاکباز، در کنار صفحه‌آرایی و ویرایش قابل قبول نشر نو، خواندن این کتاب رو برای من به تجربه‌ای فوق‌العاده لذت‌بخش تبدیل کرد。 مایکل سندل، نویسنده کتاب، با ایجاد پرسش‌های به‌جا و مثال‌ها/موارد مطالعاتی در هر بخش از کتاب، انگیزه ادامه دادن رو به‌خوبی ایجاد میکنه。 از طرفی به‌دلیل تسلط کامل بر بحث، استدلال‌های خوبی رو ارائه میکنه و در نهایت در فصل ۱۰ کتاب، نگاه من با نگاه‌اش تطبیق پیدا کرد。 نک این کتاب یک خودآموز عالی درباره مفهوم عدالت هست。 تسلط زیاد نویسنده و قدرت نگارش‌اش از یک‌سو و ترجمه خوب آقای خاکباز، در کنار صفحه‌آرایی و ویرایش قابل قبول نشر نو، خواندن این کتاب رو برای من به تجربه‌ای فوق‌العاده لذت‌بخش تبدیل کرد。 مایکل سندل، نویسنده کتاب، با ایجاد پرسش‌های به‌جا و مثال‌ها/موارد مطالعاتی در هر بخش از کتاب، انگیزه ادامه دادن رو به‌خوبی ایجاد میکنه。 از طرفی به‌دلیل تسلط کامل بر بحث، استدلال‌های خوبی رو ارائه میکنه و در نهایت در فصل ۱۰ کتاب، نگاه من با نگاه‌اش تطبیق پیدا کرد。 نکته مهم در خواندن این کتاب همدلی با اون و مزه‌مزه کردن‌اش هست。 به‌همین دلیل استفاده از تکنیک‌های تندخوانی رو پیشنهاد نمی‌کنم。ابتدا از فایده‌گرایان و بنتام و میل شروع میکنه، گریزی به رابرت نازیک میزنه، کانت و رالز رو به خوبی تبیین میکنه، نظریات دورکین رو تشریح میکنه، به ارسطو میپردازه و در نهایت در فصول ۹ و ۱۰ نتیجه‌گیری میکنه。 امیدوارم از خوندن کتاب لذت ببرید。 。。。more
Erin Crane
，
I’m not that well-read in philosophy， so I found this a helpful overview of different philosophical takes on a just society， whether or not you agree with the author’s views。 I feel more prepared to now read the primary sources he covers because of the context and framework he’s provided。
Thang
，
"Clear， strong and drastic。" "Clear， strong and drastic。" 。。。more
Yen-chun Chen
，
美國政治哲學家羅爾斯（John Rawls）所寫的<正義論>中， 他所主張思考正義的方式 : 詢問我們在初始平等狀態中， 會同意接受那些原則， 當我們在一道"無知之幕"後面進行選擇 美國政治哲學家羅爾斯（John Rawls）所寫的<正義論>中， 他所主張思考正義的方式 : 詢問我們在初始平等狀態中， 會同意接受那些原則， 當我們在一道"無知之幕"後面進行選擇 。。。more
Nguyễn Việt Đức
，
10 out of 10！ Really thought-provoking！Arguably the best book I have ever read。Sandel has done an excellent job elaborating crucial philosophical ideologies as well as giving profound insights to some of the most controversial issues。 He also tries his best not be opinionated by always presenting arguments from many perspective。
Vivek Bhasi
，
4。25/5
Elep
，
Đọc 1/2 thì nhận ra cuốn sách thuộc về triết học chính trị :-） Thông qua các ví dụ "hack não"， cuốn sách đề cập đến các triết lý， chủ nghĩa triết học， tư tưởng đứng sau cách các thể chế xã hội vận hành。 Ta cũng thấy mối quan hệ giữa đạo đức và công lý trong các xã hội đó。 Một chủ đề khó nên đương nhiên không dễ đọc， nhưng cách tiếp cận qua các ví dụ rất thú vị。 Đọc 1/2 thì nhận ra cuốn sách thuộc về triết học chính trị :-） Thông qua các ví dụ "hack não"， cuốn sách đề cập đến các triết lý， chủ nghĩa triết học， tư tưởng đứng sau cách các thể chế xã hội vận hành。 Ta cũng thấy mối quan hệ giữa đạo đức và công lý trong các xã hội đó。 Một chủ đề khó nên đương nhiên không dễ đọc， nhưng cách tiếp cận qua các ví dụ rất thú vị。 。。。more
Alex Duque
，
Un gran libro de Sandel。 No porque sea su libro más erudito， no encontrará aquí un estudio profundo de la filosofía ética y política。 Sin embargo， tampoco encontrará un repaso superficial sobre estos temas。 Sandel aborda las grandes propuestas políticas y éticas de la historia de la filosofía y aterriza dichas reflexiones a casos concretos， dónde se ponen verdaderamente a prueba。 No es una compilación histórica de las ideas políticas， sino una exposición temática dónde se encierran las grandes e Un gran libro de Sandel。 No porque sea su libro más erudito， no encontrará aquí un estudio profundo de la filosofía ética y política。 Sin embargo， tampoco encontrará un repaso superficial sobre estos temas。 Sandel aborda las grandes propuestas políticas y éticas de la historia de la filosofía y aterriza dichas reflexiones a casos concretos， dónde se ponen verdaderamente a prueba。 No es una compilación histórica de las ideas políticas， sino una exposición temática dónde se encierran las grandes escuelas y los problemas que se experimentan en el mundo actual。 Su propuesta final， una forma de comunitarismo/republicanismo de la virtud， es de gran valor para el público general y los estudiantes e interesados en filosofía。 。。。more
Nicole Abiad
，
Read for a class。 Provides an easy to follow breakdown of different theoretical perspectives on Justice。 I highly recommend to any lay reader wanting to further understand ethical considerations
Judith
，
I am so grateful for this carefully considered tour through ethical decision-making。 He proposes problems， argues for and against using strong and balanced considerations。 My slowly growing understanding of philosophical thought was developed further with Sandel's applied ideas of justice。 Especially the idea of shared responsibility and ethical individualism。 What a great teacher he is。 Thank you for the clarity and precision。 I am so grateful for this carefully considered tour through ethical decision-making。 He proposes problems， argues for and against using strong and balanced considerations。 My slowly growing understanding of philosophical thought was developed further with Sandel's applied ideas of justice。 Especially the idea of shared responsibility and ethical individualism。 What a great teacher he is。 Thank you for the clarity and precision。 。。。more
Sai Krishna
，
A good introduction to contemporary liberal thinking and their origin， partly from Kant and Rawl political philosophy。 Meaning of justice can be answered in three ways， one school of thought is general welfare of whole society（welfare）， basically maximize happiness（utilitarianism）， according to this it majorly involves increasing pleasure and reducing pain。 Second school of thought involves freedom， giving priority to individual rights and freedom over general welfare， these have majorly come fr A good introduction to contemporary liberal thinking and their origin， partly from Kant and Rawl political philosophy。 Meaning of justice can be answered in three ways， one school of thought is general welfare of whole society（welfare）， basically maximize happiness（utilitarianism）， according to this it majorly involves increasing pleasure and reducing pain。 Second school of thought involves freedom， giving priority to individual rights and freedom over general welfare， these have majorly come from Kant and Rawl。 Third school of thought involves virtues， this has come from Aristotle who thinks justice is telelogical and honorific。 Reasoning about the ends or purpose of social practice （like University admission， abortion， same sex marriage etc） and rewarding the virtues which proponent end purpose。 As per Micheal most of the current political arugments lacks telelogical thinking or arguing about what constitutes a good life which includes moral judgements。 Also includes multiple arugments in varied issues like admission quota in universities， use of golf cart in PGA championship etc。 。。。more
Harry Le
，
Sort of I-can't-sleep-at-night book Sort of I-can't-sleep-at-night book 。。。more
Nicktimebreak
，
一年前，我把大概十年前下载的“Justice”哈佛公开课看完，深受这个课程关于公正讨论的的震撼，由此买了这本书来阅读。就我有限的记忆力所回忆的情况，书本的内容基本与公开课视频上的内容一致，在一些地方做了一些扩展和作者迈克尔桑德斯的评价。作者的写作的特点是把一个观点、制度、矛盾、决定揉碎了，掰开了，从各个角度去分析，去考察，特别是他能举出众多典型并非常切合主题的例子，这也许也是政治哲学的精髓所在。多数时候我们并未能得出一个能说服所有人的结论，未能达成一致的共识。尤其是当我在阅读实体书的同时，配合着微信读书上的电子版阅读，能看到不少读者留下的不同意见之间的讨论。福利、自由、德性，公正的分配到底与哪一个方面有关，本书主要探讨了这三方面的内容。我被康德的绝对命令震撼，被罗尔斯的有利社会分配感动，钦佩于两千多年前提出目的论的亚里士多德，还有作者提及的叙述性共同体，这些纷繁的概念，每一个都值得去了解研究。这本书给我最大的意义可能并非能有一个固定的原则去指导处理现实生活，而是能让我站在一个更广的视界内用各种不同的角度去考察它。
Anvesh
，
This took me back to philosophy 101 which laid out questions of right/wrong/ethics/justice and addressed them through how philosophers over ages looked at it。 I recommend this to be read as physical copy where you underline passages and carry them with you rather than through audiobook which slips through your mind with time。
Ruthwik
，
It's a really interesting discussion would recommend to everyone and Immanuel Kant's thinking is so weird lol 。 It's a really interesting discussion would recommend to everyone and Immanuel Kant's thinking is so weird lol 。 。。。more
Donakrap Dokrappom
，
ดีงามมาก ผู้เขียนได้หยิบยกประเด็นที่มีการถกเถียงในสังคมขึ้นมาพิจารณาและกระตุ้นให้ครุ่นคิดอย่างรอบด้านมาก ๆ เช่น ประเด็นด้านศีลธรรม ด้านสังคม ด้านเศรษฐกิจ และอื่น ๆ อีกมาก แน่นอนว่าในแต่ละประเด็นเราย่อมมอบคุณค่าหรือมีความคิดโน้มเอียงไปในทางใดทางหนึ่ง แต่ผู้เขียนพยายามที่จะฉายภาพอีกมุมมองหนึ่งให้เราได้เห็นเพื่อให้เกิดการครุ้นคิดอยู่ตลอดเวลาเราเป็นสิ่งมีชีวิตที่มีอคติ เราอาจเชื่อว่าสิ่งที่เรายึดถือและให้คุณค่าคือที่สุดของทุกสิ่ง แต่มันจะมีความหมายมากแค่ไหนกัน ก็ในเมื่อเรายังอยู่ร่วมกันกับผู้อื่นในส ดีงามมาก ผู้เขียนได้หยิบยกประเด็นที่มีการถกเถียงในสังคมขึ้นมาพิจารณาและกระตุ้นให้ครุ่นคิดอย่างรอบด้านมาก ๆ เช่น ประเด็นด้านศีลธรรม ด้านสังคม ด้านเศรษฐกิจ และอื่น ๆ อีกมาก แน่นอนว่าในแต่ละประเด็นเราย่อมมอบคุณค่าหรือมีความคิดโน้มเอียงไปในทางใดทางหนึ่ง แต่ผู้เขียนพยายามที่จะฉายภาพอีกมุมมองหนึ่งให้เราได้เห็นเพื่อให้เกิดการครุ้นคิดอยู่ตลอดเวลาเราเป็นสิ่งมีชีวิตที่มีอคติ เราอาจเชื่อว่าสิ่งที่เรายึดถือและให้คุณค่าคือที่สุดของทุกสิ่ง แต่มันจะมีความหมายมากแค่ไหนกัน ก็ในเมื่อเรายังอยู่ร่วมกันกับผู้อื่นในสังคมที่ คนมีความคิดไม่เหมือนกันเป็นหนังสือที่ควรค่าแก่การอ่านอย่างยิ่ง 。。。more
Clara
，
Justice is a very engaging read for people who want to think about political justice on the basis of real-life examples （e。g。 historic trials， natural catastrophes， current events）。 Sandel presents three approaches to justice: Utilitarian theories， theories of freedom of choice， and virtue-based theories。 While the philosophical basis for each of these approaches is only sketched in broad strokes， I found the discussion of the practical implications of each of these approaches to be very nuanced Justice is a very engaging read for people who want to think about political justice on the basis of real-life examples （e。g。 historic trials， natural catastrophes， current events）。 Sandel presents three approaches to justice: Utilitarian theories， theories of freedom of choice， and virtue-based theories。 While the philosophical basis for each of these approaches is only sketched in broad strokes， I found the discussion of the practical implications of each of these approaches to be very nuanced， insightful， and accessible even to non-philosophy graduates。 Finally， Sandel gives an outlook on his own stance on justice， which， however， was a little too brief for my taste。 。。。more
Teo Mona
，
Love it！ The book used cases in real life to explain it’s points which make it easy to understand。 If you are interested in political philosophy but don’t know where to start， this book is definitely a good start as it didn’t use many fancy terms。 It also give me new insights and help me understand also think more about the regulations that we live with。
Yohan
，
makes me to think so much
Babak
，
امتياز واقعي 4。5 ستاره。 ترجمه روان آقاي افشار به همراه مطالب خواندني نويسنده درخصوص عدالت و اخلاق به همراه مثال هاي مستند فراوان。 چون در اكثر ريويوها از محتواي كتاب و سه ديدگاه مورد بحث درباره عدالت صحبت كامل شده پس سخن كوتاه مي كنم
Rafael Schneider
，
The best way to understand de principle of justice。 Sandel was a good way to show two ways for a determinate situation， so whats is right？ This is a book to open the mind to talk about justice
Theodore Chia
，
Very simplistic in its presentation of the main ideas of ethics and political philosophy。 However， it is a good introduction to philosophy
Keturah Lamb
，
*listened to audiobook*Really easy to follow along with （for the most part） and super intriguing！ May have presented the best argument I've ever heard for affirmative action 。 。 。 so good， I may nearly agree with it！ At least， when applied to universities， only。 It presented three main views of justice: utilitarian， libertarian， and morality-based。 I almost agree with the author， that the third is best。 Though I wouldn't always agree with his views。 I really loved the bits where we got into Kant *listened to audiobook*Really easy to follow along with （for the most part） and super intriguing！ May have presented the best argument I've ever heard for affirmative action 。 。 。 so good， I may nearly agree with it！ At least， when applied to universities， only。 It presented three main views of justice: utilitarian， libertarian， and morality-based。 I almost agree with the author， that the third is best。 Though I wouldn't always agree with his views。 I really loved the bits where we got into Kant's philosophy！ And then this quote: "justice is inevitably judgemental"。 The part that sticks with me quite a bit was the section on moral dilemnas。 I'm not sure what the author's opinion really was， or what the book meant to show。 I won't repeat his examples， but I will share my thoughts after reading the stories presented。 Moral dilemmas， in my opinion， or often not a sudden occurrence， but direct consequences of previous circumstances， where one more likely than not made a wrong decision。 Moral dilemmas are theoretical questions asking， "Am I justified doing something wrong for the aim of something good？" Basically， do the ends justify the means？ But then theory often plays into real life， and thus we have messy， dramatic situations。 Theory and philosophy tell us we have only one of two options， and that it is most likely best to choose the option that is evil。 But who says we have only two options？ Who says we must even choose？ If this might be the direct repercussions of a bad choice earlier made， ought we not choose the "lesser" of the options， thus paying for a mistake？ And so there is really no dilemma。 Life is a bit easier on us。 We were born with creative minds。 Why not utilize genius rather than "greater happiness" in bringing about true justice？ We don't have only two options。 Until we die， anything is possible。 And until we die， we may look back and repent of anything that may have lead us to the point at which we are now standing undecidedly。 。。。more
Parker Hewitt
，
I learned a lot reading this book。 I understand better how some people think about their moral frameworks， despite still not believing most people have coherent moral frameworks themselves。 Good starting point for people wanting to get more serious about moral and political thinking。 Despite learning a lot the author explained multiple things poorly， especially his own critique of liberal moral/political philosophy。 Maybe it seemed so weak to me because I have read other philosophy books and tak I learned a lot reading this book。 I understand better how some people think about their moral frameworks， despite still not believing most people have coherent moral frameworks themselves。 Good starting point for people wanting to get more serious about moral and political thinking。 Despite learning a lot the author explained multiple things poorly， especially his own critique of liberal moral/political philosophy。 Maybe it seemed so weak to me because I have read other philosophy books and taken a few courses before， but often times he would simply say things like， "this doesn't seem moral" and act as if that was an argument against a conclusion that logically follows from premises。 This irritates me because the way to argue with premises and conclusions isn't to say this conclusion seems wrong， I win bye-bye。 Also the part of the book where he argues that "we can't understand Robert E。 Lee's choice as a moral dilemma unless we take into account the community aspect seriously。" Thinking about this in a more rigorously we see that there is no reason given that Lee choosing Virginia over his supposed dislike of slavery is a moral dilemma。 This is a choice between a passion or feeling and fighting for a cause which we have reason to believe is moral。 The argument was never made as to why Lee's choice was a moral dilemma， Sandel just said to understand it as one we must take community into account。Morality itself is a normative thing， we need reasons to call something moral or not， we need a basis for morality， be it welfare， freedom or virtue， and Sandel， didn't in my opinion， do so satisfactorily。 There are a few paragraphs of great insight that can extend understanding and make moral arguments strong for every option presented here， but they are too far and few between。 He also uses plenty of real examples which I think is a very effective way to demonstrate moral systems at work and highlight how they fall short in the real world。 Coming from this book I know I want to read the big books of moral and political philosophy mentioned here， like Nozick and Rawls， and then still read Sandel's critique but so far this book has not convinced me of Sandel's correctness。（P。S。 The worst part of all for me was the ending where the moral system Sandel set up seemed a perfect justification for gross thinking along the lines of tribalism and collectivist thought。 I am obviously very fond of the individualist conception， but saying that there is some admirable quality in Lee choosing community over the humanity of millions of Americans trapped in slavery， to say that is a moral dilemma， seems insane to me。 Putting some concept of community solidarity over the freedom of strangers is beyond the pale in any way put forward by the author here in my view。 Those that walk away from Omelas constructs a more convincing moral argument than the last two chapters of this book。） 。。。more
JakeR
，