VIDEO
HIGHLIGHT
Log InSign up
Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 11: "THE CLAIMS OF COMMUNITY"
SummaryTranscriptChat

Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 11: "THE CLAIMS OF COMMUNITY"

Funding for the Program

This section discusses the funding provided for the program.

Funding Sources

  • Additional funding is provided for this program.

Kant's Reply to Aristotle

This section explores Kant's response to Aristotle's ideas.

Different Perspectives on Rights and the Good Life

  • Kant believes that Aristotle made a mistake in his approach.
  • According to Kant, supporting a fair framework of rights allows individuals to pursue their own conceptions of the good life.
  • However, basing laws or principles of justice on a particular conception of the good life can lead to coercion.

Purpose of Law and Constitution

This section compares Aristotle and Kant's views on law and constitution.

Role of Law and Constitution

  • For Aristotle, constitutions, laws, and rights should shape character and cultivate virtue in citizens.
  • In contrast, Kant argues that constitutions should not promote any specific way of life but instead provide a fair framework for individuals to pursue their own conceptions of the good.

Different Views on Freedom

This section examines Aristotle and Kant's differing perspectives on freedom.

Understanding Freedom

  • According to Aristotle, freedom involves realizing one's potential and living up to one's capabilities.
  • On the other hand, Kant defines freedom as acting autonomously according to self-imposed laws.

Critiques of Liberalism

This section discusses critiques of liberalism from a communitarian perspective.

Missing Dimensions in Liberalism

  • Communitarian critics argue that liberalism fails to account for moral obligations such as membership, loyalty, and solidarity.
  • They believe that liberalism's emphasis on individual freedom overlooks the importance of moral ties and obligations.

Narrative Conception of the Self

This section explores Alasdair MacIntyre's narrative conception of the self.

The Narrative Conception

  • MacIntyre proposes a narrative conception of the self, where individuals define their actions based on the stories they are a part of.
  • This perspective highlights the role of community and belonging in shaping moral obligations.

Encumbered Self and Obligations

This section discusses how the encumbered self affects our understanding of obligations.

Encumbered Self and Moral Obligations

  • The encumbered self recognizes that our identities are shaped by history, tradition, and communities we belong to.
  • Understanding our obligations requires considering these aspects of our lives.

Individualism vs. Collective Responsibility

This section contrasts individualism with collective responsibility.

Individualism and Moral Shallowness

  • Individualism emphasizes personal choice and denies responsibility for historical events or collective actions.
  • MacIntyre argues that this perspective lacks depth and fails to acknowledge collective responsibilities stemming from history.

These notes provide a comprehensive summary of the transcript, highlighting key points discussed at each timestamp.

The Communitarian Critique of Individualism

This section discusses the communitarian critique of individualism and voluntarism, focusing on the concept of the self and its ties to membership, history, story, and narrative.

Reactions to the Communitarian Critique

  • On the liberal conception, moral and political obligations arise from natural duties and voluntary obligations.
  • The communitarian argues for a third category of obligation called "obligations of solidarity or membership."
  • Obligations of membership are particular and inseparable from understanding ourselves as individuals.
  • Examples include obligations within families or communities that do not necessarily stem from consent.

Examples of Obligations of Membership

This section provides examples to illustrate obligations of membership that are particular but not based on consent.

Family Obligations

  • In a situation where two children are drowning, one being your own child and the other a stranger's child, is there an obligation to save your own child without flipping a coin?
  • Similarly, when it comes to caring for aging parents, is there a greater obligation towards one's own parent compared to helping strangers?

Political Obligations

  • During World War II, a French Resistance pilot refused to bomb his home village due to his sense of loyalty and solidarity with his people.
  • In another example, during a famine in Ethiopia, the Israeli government organized an airlift specifically for Ethiopian Jews. Is this morally troubling partiality or an obligation of solidarity?

Patriotism and National Boundaries

This section explores the moral significance of national boundaries and patriotism in relation to obligations.

Moral Significance of National Boundaries

  • Why do Americans have a greater responsibility for the welfare of people in Franklin, Texas, compared to equally needy people across the border in Franklin, Mexico?

Obligations of Citizenship

  • The communitarian account suggests that patriotism can be a virtue as it expresses obligations of citizenship.
  • The idea is that membership matters and obligations towards one's own community or country are significant.

Perspectives on Obligations of Solidarity

This section presents different perspectives on the concept of obligations of solidarity or membership.

Critics' Perspective

  • Critics argue that recognizing obligations of membership may lead to conflicting claims and difficulties in choosing between competing obligations.

Universal Community Perspective

  • One solution proposed is viewing ourselves as members of the universal human community, with smaller spheres such as nationality or affiliation being secondary.
  • The most important community to be obligated to is the community of human beings.

Specific Obligations Perspective

  • Some argue that specific obligations, such as those towards family or local communities, should take precedence over universal obligations.
  • It is seen as arbitrary to prioritize universal obligations over more specific ones.

The transcript provided does not include timestamps for all sections.

The Narrative of Citizenship

In this section, the speaker discusses the concept of citizenship as a constructed narrative and questions its validity.

Membership and Citizenship

  • Some memberships are natural narratives, while the narrative of citizenship is a constructed one.
  • The speaker believes that citizenship is a false narrative because it is based on historical accidents like birthplace.
  • They question why they should be a part of the membership (citizenship) that was determined by chance.

Moral Obligations and Kinship

This section explores where moral obligations arise from and discusses kinship and reciprocity as potential sources.

Sources of Moral Obligations

  • Moral obligations can arise from two places: kinship and reciprocity.
  • There is a natural reciprocity in interactions with people who are closer to us, such as neighbors or fellow citizens.
  • The speaker suggests that individuals may naturally feel more connected to their own country due to interactions and trade.

Patriotism as Communitarian Belief

Here, the discussion focuses on patriotism as a communitarian belief and draws comparisons to school spirit or house pride.

Patriotism vs. Sentimental Attachment

  • Patriotism can be compared to school spirit or house pride, where individuals develop attachment or pride associated with their community.
  • A distinction can be made between moral obligations based on communitarian beliefs and sentimental attachments.

Obligation towards Parents

This section delves into the obligation towards parents and whether it is solely sentimental or carries moral weight.

Obligation towards Parents

  • The speaker argues that an initial accident (such as being born into a certain family) does not preclude developing moral obligations later in life.
  • Examples of adoption highlight that obligations can be based on meaningful exchanges and interactions, not just biological ties.

Obligation towards Bad Parents

The discussion explores whether individuals with bad parents owe them less in terms of obligation.

Obligation towards Bad Parents

  • The speaker acknowledges uncertainty regarding the obligation towards bad parents since they have never experienced it personally.
  • They suggest that accidents in the initial stage may not preclude moral obligations later, as benefits received from parents can create a sense of obligation.

Objections to Obligations of Solidarity

This section addresses objections to the idea of obligations of solidarity or membership beyond consent.

Conflicting Obligations and Emotional Attachments

  • One objection raised is that obligations may conflict when individuals belong to multiple communities.
  • Another objection suggests that examples used to illustrate solidarity and membership actually point more towards emotional attachments rather than true moral obligations.

Liberal Ideas and Patriotism

Here, objections are discussed regarding patriotism as an obligation of solidarity and membership beyond consent.

Liberal Ideas and Consent

  • Some objections argue that all obligations, including patriotism, are based on liberal ideas and compatible with consent or reciprocity.
  • Julia Rawls' viewpoint aligns with this argument, stating that liberalism endorses patriotism as a voluntary moral obligation.

Political Obligation and Consent

This section explores Rawls' perspective on political obligation and the role of consent in citizenship.

Rawls' View on Political Obligation

  • Rawls acknowledges that for ordinary citizens, there is no political obligation unless willingly undertaken through an act of consent.
  • This aligns with Julia's point about voluntary choices capturing the moral force of community values.

Strongest Objections to Obligations of Solidarity

The discussion focuses on the strongest objections to the idea of obligations of solidarity or membership.

Conflicting Obligations and Emotional vs. True Moral Obligations

  • One objection raised is that obligations may conflict when individuals belong to multiple communities.
  • Examples used to illustrate solidarity and membership are argued to be more about emotion and sentiment rather than true moral obligations.

Examining Objections to Solidarity

This section continues examining objections to the idea of obligations of solidarity or membership.

Objections Based on Liberal Ideas

  • Some objections argue that all obligations, including patriotism, are based on liberal ideas and compatible with consent or reciprocity.

Obligations Based on Liberal Ideas

The discussion explores how obligations of patriotism or community can be based on liberal ideas.

Liberal Ideas and Consent

  • All obligations, including patriotism, can be seen as based on liberal ideas and compatible with consent or reciprocity.

Patriotism as a Voluntary Moral Obligation

This section highlights Julia's perspective on patriotism as a voluntary moral obligation within a liberal framework.

Patriotism as Voluntary Choice

  • Julia argues that liberalism allows individuals the freedom to choose expressions of virtues like patriotism voluntarily.
  • A non-voluntary particular moral obligation is not necessary to capture the moral force of community values.

Political Obligation and Consent in Rawls' View

Rawls' view on political obligation and consent is discussed further in relation to citizenship.

Political Obligation for Ordinary Citizens

  • Rawls acknowledges that there is no political obligation strictly speaking for ordinary citizens unless willingly undertaken through an act of consent.
  • This aligns with Julia's point about voluntary choices capturing the moral force of community values.

Rawls' Perspective on Political Obligation

The discussion continues with Rawls' perspective on political obligation and consent.

Political Obligation and Consent

  • Rawls argues that political obligation exists when individuals willingly undertake or choose such an obligation through consent.
  • This aligns with Julia's viewpoint and supports the idea of voluntary moral obligations within a liberal framework.

New Section

This section discusses the objections to patriotism as a moral obligation and the defense of patriotism as a communal obligation.

Objections to Patriotism as Collective Selfishness

  • Some argue that obligations of membership are a form of collective selfishness.
  • They question why we should honor these obligations and consider them prejudice.

Defense of Patriotism as Communal Obligation

  • People who defend patriotism as a communal obligation gather to respond to critics.
  • Ajay Kumar argues that he owes more to his country than humanity in general because his country is an integral part of his identity, similar to loving one's parents more than others.
  • Ajay believes in the moral obligation that comes from a communitarian responsibility towards people and groups that shape one's identity.
  • He gives examples of how certain values and freedoms in his country contribute to his sense of patriotism.

New Section

This section focuses on defending patriotism as a moral obligation that cannot be reduced to purely consent-based terms.

Moral Obligation Beyond Consent-Based Terms

  • The discussion continues with the defense of patriotism as a moral obligation.
  • Ajay Kumar explains that there is a fundamental moral obligation based on communitarian responsibility towards people and groups shaping one's identity.
  • The example is given that even at Harvard, individuals may owe more to their roommates who contribute significantly to their experience than the Harvard community as a whole.

New Section

In this section, different perspectives on patriotic obligations are discussed, including personal experiences and historical contexts.

Perspectives on Patriotic Obligations

  • Ajay Kumar emphasizes the importance of personal experiences and how they shape one's sense of patriotic obligations.
  • Another participant raises concerns about feeling obligated towards Nazi Germany if they were born there, highlighting the role of personal beliefs and values.
  • The discussion touches on the idea that patriotism can be expressed through objection and protest against certain actions or policies of one's country.

New Section

This section explores the concept of moral obligation to society and the extent of that obligation.

Moral Obligation to Society

  • The debate centers around whether individuals have a moral obligation to society beyond reciprocity.
  • One participant argues that obligations arise from participating in society, such as paying taxes and voting, but not solely from being a member of society itself.
  • The viewpoint is expressed that individuals owe something to society only in terms of what they receive in terms of protection, safety, and security.

New Section

This section delves into the nature of patriotic love for one's country and its relationship with moral obligations.

Love for Country and Moral Obligations

  • Participants discuss how love for one's country can coexist with criticism towards its government or policies.
  • The argument is made that loving one's country does not necessarily mean blindly supporting everything it does but rather engaging in issues with a sense of common civic virtue.
  • The importance of civic responsibility is emphasized as an essential aspect of patriotism.

New Section

This section examines the concept of communal obligation or patriotism as a blank moral check.

Communal Obligation and Blank Moral Check

  • A participant questions whether communal obligation or patriotism means giving a blank moral check to the community without knowing its future actions or alignment with personal beliefs.
  • The discussion references John Locke's perspective on societal obligations and exit options if dissatisfied with one's society.
  • It is argued that while some level of obligation arises from participation in society, stronger justification is needed for considering it a moral obligation.

New Section

This section explores the idea of owing something to society based on reciprocity and the limits of moral obligations.

Obligations Based on Reciprocity

  • The viewpoint is presented that individuals may be morally obliged to society due to reciprocity, such as participating in societal activities like paying taxes and voting.
  • However, it is argued that there is no inherent obligation solely based on being a member of society beyond what one receives in terms of protection and security.

New Section

This section emphasizes the importance of patriotism as a virtue and its role in civic engagement.

Patriotism as Civic Virtue

  • The discussion highlights that patriotism is important for fostering a sense of community and common civic virtue.
  • It is acknowledged that loving one's country does not imply agreement with all government actions but rather an active engagement in issues.
  • The love for one's country can coexist with criticism towards specific policies or actions.

New Section

This section discusses the different perspectives on patriotism and loyalty within a community. The debate revolves around whether patriotic obligations should be based on communal loyalty or universal principles of justice.

Defining Patriotism

  • Jain Rahul argues for a pluralistic, argumentative, and critically-minded patriotism that engages all members of the community on moral grounds.
  • Critics of patriotism, represented by ICANN, express concerns about taking patriotic obligations in a communal way seriously as it may limit the ability to choose beliefs or actions based on individual judgment.

Moral Worth of Patriotism

  • Julia questions the definition of patriotism presented, suggesting that it undermines the moral worth of patriotism as a virtue if it is merely about civic involvement and debating within society.
  • The need for an example from defenders of communitarianism is highlighted to demonstrate how loyalty can compete with universal principles of justice.

Loyalty vs Universal Principles

  • A student named Dan presents an example where he would not turn in his roommate for cheating despite knowing it is wrong because he feels obligated to stand by him. This case challenges the ethic of loyalty and its relationship with universal moral claims.
  • Peggy agrees with Dan's choice but acknowledges that it may not be morally right. She suggests that most people would make similar choices based on loyalty rather than universal principles.
  • Another student points out that as a roommate, Dan has insider information which might not be fair to use against his roommate in a greater community context. Loyalty is seen as an ethical consideration in this case.
  • Wojtek agrees with Dan, emphasizing the importance of loyalty as an ethical principle. He argues that there is no duty to report someone who cheated if you have been advantaged by having that information.

Examples of Loyalty

  • Billy Bulger's case is presented, where he refused to provide information about his fugitive brother to the US Attorney, citing loyalty to his family over loyalty to the people of Massachusetts. The audience is asked for their opinion on this situation.
  • Robert E. Lee's case is discussed, where he chose not to raise his hand against his relatives and home state of Virginia during the Civil War despite his devotion to the Union. This example further explores loyalty versus universal principles in a more fateful context.

Loyalty and Moral Dilemmas

This section discusses the concept of loyalty in moral dilemmas and the conflicting obligations individuals may face.

Conflicting Communities and Obligations

  • Loyalty can create moral dilemmas when individuals have conflicting obligations to different communities, such as family and country.
  • The idea of choice in obligations is important to resolve conflicts between communities.
  • Making choices based on characteristics other than arbitrary community membership is crucial to avoid randomness.

Grounds for Choosing Loyalty

  • The question is not whether individuals make a choice, but on what grounds or principles they should base their loyalty.
  • There seems to be a trend where people prioritize loyalty to their more immediate or local community over larger entities like the United States.
  • Different people have different means of making these choices, indicating that there is no one set of values or morality that communitarians can adhere to.

Implications for Justice

  • The concern with loyalty and membership having independent moral weight is that it undermines finding principles of justice detached from conceptions of the good life within a community.
  • If justice is tied solely to shared understandings or conventions within a society, it may lead to unjust outcomes, as demonstrated by arguments made in support of segregation in the American South during the 1950s.

Justice and Conceptions of the Good Life

This section explores whether justice can be detached from conceptions of the good life within a community and the implications of tying justice to shared understandings or traditions.

Justice as Relative to Social Meanings

  • Michael Walzer argues that justice is relative to social meanings and a society is just if it lives in a way faithful to shared understandings.
  • This perspective suggests that independent principles of justice may not exist, leaving justice as a matter of fidelity to prevailing values or conventions within a society.

Questioning Tying Justice to Shared Understandings

  • A clip from the documentary "Eyes on the Prize" showcases American Southerners defending segregation based on loyalty and tradition. This challenges the idea of tying arguments about justice solely to shared understandings or traditions.

Conclusion

The conclusion reflects on the limitations of tying justice to shared understandings and traditions within a community.

Limitations of Tying Justice to Shared Understandings

  • The arguments made by individuals supporting segregation demonstrate that justice cannot be solely tied to prevailing shared understandings or traditions without raising concerns about fairness and equality.

Visit justiceharvard.org

The speaker suggests visiting justiceharvard.org and emphasizes that it is the right thing to do.

Importance of Visiting justiceharvard.org

  • The speaker encourages the audience to visit justiceharvard.org.
  • It is emphasized that visiting the website is the right thing to do.

Timestamp 0:54:05 corresponds to 3245 seconds.

Video description

To register for the 2015 course, visit https://www.edx.org/course/justice-harvardx-er22-1x-0. PART ONE: THE CLAIMS OF COMMUNITY Professor Sandel presents Kants objections to Aristotles theory. Kant believes politics must respect individual freedom. People must always respect other peoples freedom to make their own choices—a universal duty to humanity—but for Kant, there is no other source of moral obligation. The discussion of Kants view leads to an introduction to the communitarian philosophy. Communitarians argue that, in addition to voluntary and universal duties, we also have obligations of membership, solidarity, and loyalty. These obligations are not necessarily based on consent. We inherit our past, and our identities, from our family, city, or country. But what happens if our obligations to our family or community come into conflict with our universal obligations to humanity? PART TWO: WHERE OUR LOYALTY LIES Professor Sandel leads a discussion about the arguments for and against obligations of solidarity and membership. Do we owe more to our fellow citizens that to citizens of other countries? Is patriotism a virtue, or a prejudice for ones own kind? If our identities are defined by the particular communities we inhabit, what becomes of universal human rights? Using various scenarios, students debate whether or not obligations of loyalty can ever outweigh universal duties of justice.