第41章

类别:其他 作者:Henry Sidgwick字数:6224更新时间:18/12/26 16:30:38
Wehaveseenthatindelineatingtheoutlineofduty,asintuitivelyrecognised,wehavetoattempttogivetocommontermsadefiniteandprecisemeaning。Thisprocessofdefinitionalwaysrequiressomereflectionandcare,andissometimesoneofconsiderabledifficulty。Butthereisnocasewherethedifficultyisgreater,ortheresultmoredisputed,thanwhenwetrytodefineJustice。 Beforemakingtheattempt,itmaybeaswelltoremindthereaderwhatitisthatwehavetodo。WehavenottoinquireintothederivationofthenotionofJustice,aswearenotnowstudyingthehistoryofourethicalthought,butitsactualcondition。Norcanweprofesstofurnishadefinitionwhichwillcorrespondtoeverypartofthecommonusageoftheterm;formanypersonsareundoubtedlyvagueandlooseintheirapplicationofcurrentmoralnotions。ButitisanassumptionoftheIntuitionalmethodthattheterm`justice’denotesaqualitywhichitisultimatelydesirabletorealiseintheconductandsocialrelationsofmen;andthatadefinitionmaybegivenofthiswhichwillbeacceptedbyallcompetentjudgesaspresenting,inaclearandexplicitform,whattheyhavealwaysmeantbytheterm,thoughperhapsimplicitlyandvaguely。Inseekingsuchadefinitionwemay,sotospeak,cliptheraggededgeofcommonusage,butwemustnotmakeexcisionofanyconsiderableportion。[2] PerhapsthefirstpointthatstrikesuswhenwereflectuponournotionofJusticeisitsconnexionwithLaw。ThereisnodoubtthatjustconductistoagreatextentdeterminedbyLaw,andincertainapplicationsthetwotermsseeminterchangeable。Thuswespeakindifferentlyof`LawCourts’and`CourtsofJustice’andwhenaprivatecitizendemandsJustice,orhisjustrights,hecommonlymeanstodemandthatLawshouldbecarriedintoeffect。StillreflectionshowsthatwedonotmeanbyJusticemerelyconformitytoLaw。Forfirst,wedonotalwayscalltheviolatorsoflawunjust,butonlyofsomeLaws:not,forexample,duellistsorgamblers。Andsecondly,weoftenjudgethatLawasitexistsdoesnotcompletelyrealiseJustice;ournotionofJusticefurnishesastandardwithwhichwecompareactuallaws,andpronouncethemjustorunjust。And,thirdly,thereisapartofjustconductwhichliesoutsidethesphereevenofLawasitoughttobe;forexample,wethinkthatafathermaybejustorunjusttohischildreninmatterswherethelawleaves(andoughttoleave)himfree。 WemustthendistinguishJusticefromwhathasbeencalledthevirtueordutyofOrder,orLaw-observance:andperhaps,ifweexaminethepointsofdivergencejustmentioned,weshallbeledtothetruedefinitionofJustice。 Letusthereforefirstask,OfwhatkindoflawsistheobservancegenerallythoughttobearealisationofJustice?Inmostcasestheymightbedescribedaslawswhichdefineandsecuretheinterestsofassignableindividuals。Butthisdescriptionisnotcomplete,asJusticeisadmittedlyconcernedintheapportionmentofadequatepunishmenttoeachoffender;thoughweshouldnotsaythatamanhadaninterestintheadequacyofhispunishment。Letussay,then,thatthelawsinwhichJusticeisoroughttoberealised,arelawswhichdistributeandallottoindividualseitherobjectsofdesire,libertiesandprivileges,orburdensandrestraints,orevenpainsassuch。Theselatter,however,areonlyallottedbylawtopersonswhohavebrokenotherlaws。Andasalllawisenforcedbypenalties,weseehowtheadministrationoflawgenerallymaybeviewedastheadministrationofJustice,inaccordancewiththisdefinition: notbecausealllawsareprimarilyandintheirfirstintentiondistributive,butbecausetheexecutionoflawgenerallyinvolvesthedueallotmentofpainsandlossesandrestraintstothepersonswhoviolateit。Or,moreprecisely,weshouldsaythatthislegaldistributionoughttorealiseJustice,forwehaveseenthatitmayfailtodoso。Wehavenexttoask,therefore,Whatconditionsmustlawsfulfilinorderthattheymaybejustintheirdistributiveeffects? Here,however,itmayseemthatwearetransgressingthelimitwhichdividesEthicsfromPolities:forEthicsisprimarilyconcernedwiththeruleswhichoughttogoverntheprivateconductofindividuals。 anditiscommonlythoughtthatprivatepersonsoughttoobeyevenlawsthattheyregardasunjust,ifestablishedbylawfulauthority。Still,thisisdoubtedinthecaseoflawsthatseemextremelyunjust:as(e。g。) theFugitiveSlavelawintheUnitedStatesbeforetherebellion。Atanyrateitseemsdesirablethatweshouldheredigresssomewhatintopoliticaldiscussion;partlyinordertoelucidatethenotionofJustice,whichseemstobeessentiallythesameinbothregions,andpartlybecauseitisofgreatpracticalimportancetoindividuals,inregulatingprivateconductbeyondtherangeofLaw-observance,toknowwhetherthelawsandestablishedorderofthesocietyinwhichtheylivearejustorunjust。 NowperhapsthemostobviousandcommonlyrecognisedcharacteristicofjustlawsisthattheyareEqual:andinsomedepartmentsoflegislation,atleast,thecommonnotionofJusticeseemstobeexhaustivelyexpressedbythatofEquality。Itiscommonlythought,forexample,thatasystemoftaxationwouldbeperfectlyjustifitimposedexactlyequalburdensuponall:[3] andthoughthisnotionof’equalburden’isitselfsomewhatdifficulttodefinewiththeprecisionrequiredforpracticalapplication,stillwemaysaythatJusticehereisthoughttoresolveitselfintoakindofequality。 However,wecannotaffirmgenerallythatalllawsoughttoaffectallpersonsequally,forthiswouldleavenoplaceforanylawsallottingspecialprivilegesandburdenstospecialclassesofthecommunity;butwedonotthinkallsuchlawsnecessarilyunjust:e。g。wethinkitnotunjustthatonlypersonsappointedinacertainwayshouldshareinlegislation,andthatmenshouldbeforcedtofightfortheircountrybutnotwomen。Hencesomehavesaidthattheonlysenseinwhichjusticerequiresalawtobeequalisthatitsexecutionmustaffectequallyalltheindividualsbelongingtoanyoftheclassesspecifiedinthelaw。Andnodoubtthisruleexcludesaveryrealkindofinjustice:itisofthehighestimportancethatjudgesandadministratorsshouldneverbepersuadedbymoneyorotherwisetoshow`respectofpersons’。Somuchequality,however,isinvolvedintheverynotionofalaw,ifitbecouchedingeneralterms:anditisplainthatlawsmaybeequallyexecutedandyetunjust:forexample,weshouldconsideralawunjustwhichcompelledonlyred-hairedmentoserveinthearmy,eventhoughitwereappliedwiththestrictestimpartialitytoallred-hairedmen。Wemustthereforeconclude,that,inlayingdownthelawnolessthanincarryingitout,allinequalityaffectingtheinterestsofindividualswhichappearsarbitrary,andforwhichnosufficientreasoncanbegiven,isheldtobeunjust。Butwehavestilltoask,whatkindofreasonsforinequalityJusticeadmitsandfromwhatgeneralprinciple(orprinciples) allsuchreasonsaretobededuced? Perhapsweshallfinditeasiertoanswerthisquestion,ifweexaminethenotionofJusticeasappliedtothatpartofprivateconductwhichliesbeyondthesphereoflaw。Here,again,wemayobservethatthenotionofJusticealwaysinvolvesallotmentofsomethingconsideredasadvantageousordisadvantageous:whetheritbemoneyorothermaterialmeansofhappiness;orpraise,oraffection,orotherimmaterialgood,orsomemeritedpainorloss。HenceIshouldanswerthequestionraisedintheprecedingchapter(§;3),astotheclassificationofthedutiestherediscussedundertheheadsofJusticeandBenevolencerespectively,bysayingthatthefulfilmentofanydutyoftheaffections,consideredbyitself,doesnotexemplifyJustice:butthatwhenwecometocomparetheobligationsarisingoutofdifferentaffectionaterelations,andtoconsidertherightallotmentofloveandkindservices,thenotionofJusticebecomesapplicable。InordertoarrangethisallotmentproperlywehavetoinquirewhatisJust。Whatthendowemeanbyajustmaninmatterswherelaw-observancedoesnotenter?Itisnaturaltoreplythatwemeananimpartialman,onewhoseekswithequalcaretosatisfyallclaimswhichherecognisesasvalidanddoesnotlethimselfbeundulyinfluencedbypersonalpreferences。Andthisseemsanadequateaccountofthevirtueofjusticesofarasweconsideritmerelysubjectively,andindependentlyoftheintellectualinsightrequiredfortherealisationofobjectivejusticeinaction:ifweneglecttogivedueconsiderationtoanyclaimwhichweregardasreasonable,ouractioncannotbejustinintention。Thisdefinitionsufficestoexcludewilfulinjustice:butitisobviousthatitdoesnotgiveusasufficientcriterionofjustacts,anymorethantheabsenceofarbitraryinequalitywasfoundtobeasufficientcriterionofjustlaws。Wewanttoknowwhatarereasonableclaims。 Well,ofthesethemostimportant——apartfromtheclaimsdiscussedintheprecedingchapter——seemstobethatresultingfromcontract。Thisistoacertainextentenforcedbylaw:butitiscleartousthatajustmanwillkeepengagementsgenerally,evenwhentheremaybenolegalpenaltyattachedtotheirviolation。Theexactdefinitionofthisduty,anditscommonlyadmittedqualifications,willbediscussedinthenextchapter:butofitsgeneralbindingnessCommonSensehasnodoubt。 Further,weincludeundertheideaofbindingengagementsnotmerelyverbalpromises,butalsowhatarecalled`impliedcontracts’ or`tacitunderstandings’。Butthislattertermisadifficultonetokeepprecise:and,infact,isoftenusedtoincludenotonlythecasewhereAhasinsomewaypositivelyimpliedapledgetoB,butalsothecasewhereBhascertainexpectationsofwhichAisaware。 Here,however,theobligationisnotsoclear:foritwouldhardlybesaidthatamanisboundtodispelallerroneousexpectationsthathemayknowtobeformedrespectinghisconduct,attheriskofbeingrequiredtofulfilthem。Still,iftheexpectationwassuchasmostpersonswouldformunderthecircumstances,thereseemstobesomesortofmoralobligationtofulfilit,ifitdoesnotconflictwithotherduties,thoughtheobligationseemslessdefiniteandstringentthanthatarisingoutofcontract。IndeedI thinkwemayBaythatJusticeisgenerally,thoughsomewhatvaguely,heldtoprescribethefulfilmentofallsuchexpectations(ofservices,etc。) asarisenaturallyandnormallyoutoftherelations,voluntaryorinvoluntary,inwhichwestandtowardsotherhumanbeings。Butthediscussionsintheprecedingchapterhaveshownthedifficultyofdefiningeventhosedutiesofthiskindwhich,inanindefiniteform,seemedcertainandindisputable: whileothersareonlydefinedbycustomswhichtoreflectionappeararbitrary。 Andthoughwhilethesecustomspersist,theexpectationsspringingfromthemareinacertainsensenatural,sothatajustmanseemstobeunderakindofobligationtofulfilthem,thisobligationcannotberegardedasclearorcomplete,fortworeasonsthatweregiveninthelastchapter; first,becausecustomsarecontinuallyvarying,andaslongasanyoneisinastateofvariation,growingordecaying,thevalidityofthecustomaryclaimisobviouslydoubtful;andSecondly,becauseitdoesnotseemrightthatanirrationalandinexpedientcustomshouldlastforever,andyetitcanonlybeabolishedbybeing``morehonouredinthebreachthanintheobservance’’。 Thislineofreflectionthereforehaslandedusinarealperplexityrespectingthedepartmentofdutywhichweareatpresentexamining。Justiceissomethingthatweconceivetobeintrinsicallycapableofperfectlydefinitedetermination:ascrupulouslyjustman,wethink,mustbeveryexactandpreciseinhisconduct。ButwhenweconsiderthatpartofJusticewhichconsistsinsatisfyingsuchnaturalandcustomaryclaimsasariseindependentlyofcontract,itseemsimpossibletoestimatetheseclaimswithanyexactness。TheattempttomapouttheregionofJusticerevealstousasortofmarginordimborderland,tenantedbyexpectationswhicharenotquiteclaimsandwithregardtowhichwedonotfeelsurewhetherJusticedoesordoesnotrequireustosatisfythem。Fortheordinaryactionsofmenproceedontheexpectationthatthefuturewillresemblethepast:henceitseemsnaturaltoexpectthatanyparticularmanwilldoasothersdoinsimilarcircumstances,and,stillmore,thathewillcontinuetodowhateverhehashithertobeeninthehabitofdoing;accordinglyhisfellow-menareinclinedtothinkthemselveswrongedbyhissuddenlyomittinganycustomaryorhabitualact,iftheomissioncausesthemlossorinconvenience。[2]Ontheotherhand,ifamanhasgivennopledgetomaintainacustomorhabit,itseemshardthatheshouldbeboundbytheunwarrantedexpectationsofothers。Inthisperplexity,commonsenseoftenappearstodecidedifferentlycasessimilarinallrespects,exceptinthequantityofdisappointmentcausedbythechange。Forinstance,ifapoormanweretoleaveonetradesmananddealwithanotherbecausethefirsthadturnedQuaker,weshouldhardlycallitanactofinjustice,howeverunreasonablewemightthinkit:butifarichcountrygentlemanweretoactsimilarlytowardsapoorneighbour,manypersonswouldsaythatitwasunjustpersecution。 Thedifficultyjustpointedoutextendsequallytothedutiesofkindness——eventothespeciallystringentandsacreddutiesofthedomesticaffectionsandgratitude——discussedinthepreviouschapter。Wecannotgetanynewprincipleforsettlinganyconflictthatmaypresentitselfamongsuchduties,byasking`whatJusticerequiresofus’:theapplicationofthenotionofJusticeonlyleadsustoviewtheprobleminanewaspect——asaquestionoftherightdistributionofkindservices——itdoesnothelpustosolveit。Hadweclearandpreciseintuitiveprinciplesfordeterminingtheclaims(e。g。)ofparentsonchildren,childrenonparents,benefactorsontherecipientsoftheirbenefits,wemightsayexactlyatwhatpointortowhatextentthesatisfactionofoneoftheseclaimsoughtinjusticetobepostponedtothesatisfactionofanother,ortoanyworthyaimofadifferentkind:butIknownomethodofdeterminingaproblemofthiskindwhichisnoteitherimplicitlyutilitarian,orarbitrarilydogmatic,andunsupportedbyCommonSense。