Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? 1st Edition, Kindle Edition

by Michael J. Sandel (Author) Format: Kindle Edition

2,781 ratings

Flip to back Flip to front

Audible Sample Playing... Paused You are listening to a sample of the Audible narration for this Kindle book.
Learn more

ISBN-13: 978-0374532505

ISBN-10: 9781429952682

Why is ISBN important?

Share <Embed>

Other Sellers

from

Other Sellers

See all 13 versions

Buy

$11.99

eBook features:

Highlight, take notes, and search in the book
In this edition, page numbers are just like the physical edition
Length: 322 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Audible book:
Audible book
Switch back and forth between reading the Kindle book and listening to the Audible book with Whispersync for Voice. Add the Audible book for a reduced price of $7.49 when you buy the Kindle book.
Available

Read with the free Kindle apps (available on iOS, Android, PC & Mac), Kindle E-readers and on Fire Tablet devices. See all supported devices

Sold by: Macmillan

Print List Price: $18.00 Save $6.01 (33%)‎

Price set by seller.

Add Audible narration to your purchase for just $7.49

Deliver to your Kindle or other device

Enter a promotion code or Gift Card

A renowned Harvard professor's brilliant, sweeping, inspiring account of the role of justice in our society--and of the moral dilemmas we face as citizens

What are our obligations to others as people in a free society? Should government tax the rich to help the poor? Is the free market fair? Is it sometimes wrong to tell the truth? Is killing sometimes morally required? Is it possible, or desirable, to legislate morality? Do individual rights and the common good conflict?

Michael J. Sandel's "Justice" course is one of the most popular and influential at Harvard. Up to a thousand students pack the campus theater to hear Sandel relate the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day, and this fall, public television will air a series based on the course. Justice offers readers the same exhilarating journey that captivates Harvard students. This book is a searching, lyrical exploration of the meaning of justice, one that invites readers of all political persuasions to consider familiar controversies in fresh and illuminating ways. Affirmative action, same-sex marriage, physician-assisted suicide, abortion, national service, patriotism and dissent, the moral limits of markets—Sandel dramatizes the challenge of thinking through these con?icts, 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.

Michael J. Sandel
1,949
Kindle Edition
1 offer from $11.99
Michael J. Sandel
1,041
Kindle Edition
1 offer from $10.99
Michael J. Sandel
19
Kindle Edition
1 offer from $16.17
Michael J. Sandel
32
Kindle Edition
1 offer from $15.12
Michael J. Sandel
17
Kindle Edition
1 offer from $37.99
Mark F. Godwin
84
Kindle Edition
1 offer from $4.99

Create your FREE Amazon Business account to save up to 10% with Business-only prices and free shipping. Register today

Editorial Reviews

Review

“This book is absolutely indispensable for anyone who wants to be a good citizen. It shows how to balance competing values, a talent our nation desperately needs nowadays.” —Walter Isaacson, author of Benjamin Franklin: An American Life

“More than exhilarating; exciting in its ability to persuade this student/reader, time and again, that the principle now being invoked—on this page, in this chapter—is the one to deliver the sufficiently inclusive guide to the making of a decent life.”— Vivian Gornick, Boston Review

“Sandel explains theories of justice…with clarity and immediacy; the ideas of Aristotle, Jeremy Bentham, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Robert Nozick and John Rawls have rarely, if ever, been set out as accessibly… In terms we can all understand, ‘Justice’ confronts us with the concepts that lurk, so often unacknowledged, beneath our conflicts.”— Jonathan Rauch, New York Times

“Sandel dazzles in this sweeping survey of hot topics…. Erudite, conversational and deeply humane, this is truly transformative reading.”— Publishers Weekly, starred review

“A spellbinding philosopher…. For Michael Sandel, justice is not a spectator sport…. He is calling for nothing less than a reinvigoration of citizenship.”— Samuel Moyn, The Nation

“Michael Sandel, perhaps the most prominent college professor in America,…practices the best kind of academic populism, managing to simplify John Stuart Mill and John Rawls without being simplistic. But Sandel is best at what he calls bringing ‘moral clarity to the alternatives we confront as democratic citizens’…. He ends up clarifying a basic political divide — not between left and right, but between those who recognize nothing greater than individual rig...

From Publishers Weekly

Starred Review. Harvard government professor Sandel (Public Philosophy) dazzles in this sweeping survey of hot topics—the recent government bailouts, the draft, surrogate pregnancies, same-sex marriage, immigration reform and reparations for slavery—that situates various sides in the debates in the context of timeless philosophical questions and movements. Sandel takes utilitarianism, Kant's categorical imperative and Rawls's theory of justice out of the classroom, dusts them off and reveals how crucial these theories have been in the construction of Western societies—and how they inform almost every issue at the center of our modern-day polis. The content is dense but elegantly presented, and Sandel has a rare gift for making complex issues comprehensible, even entertaining (see his sections entitled Shakespeare versus the Simpsons and What Ethics Can Learn from Jack Benny and Miss Manners), without compromising their gravity. With exegeses of Winnie the Pooh, transcripts of Bill Clinton's impeachment hearing and the works of almost every major political philosopher, Sandel reveals how even our most knee-jerk responses bespeak our personal conceptions of the rights and obligations of the individual and society at large. Erudite, conversational and deeply humane, this is truly transformative reading. (Oct.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

About the Author

Michael J. Sandel is the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government at Harvard University, where he has taught since 1980, and the author of many books. He lives in Brookline, Massachusetts.

--This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

From The Washington Post

From The Washington Post's Book World/washingtonpost.com Reviewed by Dennis Drabelle drabelled@washpost.com The philosophy prof as TV star: Not many thinkers can pull that off, but Michael Sandel has taken his courses on political philosophy from the halls of Harvard to the nation's small screens, courtesy of PBS. Sandel's appeal lies partly in the striking hypotheticals he throws out, such as whether it's okay to kill one person directly (on an overloaded lifeboat, for example) to save three others; and partly in the way he makes good use of even rambling responses by the students he calls upon. He also discusses thorny issues with clarity, insight and a broad range of references -- traits on display in his new book. In a chapter on equality, Sandel addresses a question raised by the philosopher John Rawls: whether we should settle for a system in which "the average schoolteacher . . . makes about $43,000 a year [while] David Letterman . . . earns $31 million a year." After summarizing Rawls's observations about the many contingencies affecting how one's talents match (or do not) the needs of the society in which one lives, Sandel brings the discussion down to Earth by quoting from Woody Allen's movie "Stardust Memories." The much wealthier and more famous character played by Allen defends his celebrityhood to an old friend, now a cabbie, by saying: "If I had been an Apache Indian, those guys didn't need comedians at all, right? So I'd be out of work." The cabbie, however, gets the last word: "Oh, come on, that doesn't help me feel any better."
Copyright 2009, The Washington Post. All Rights Reserved. --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

Review

"Sandel offers a primer on a number of theories of justice and applies them to questions that are (or have been) the subject of political discourse. Emphasizing the accessibility of the material, Sandel presents summaries of these theories that are clear and easy to understand." - AudioFile

“Sandel maintains a consistently engaging tone, and his probing moral questions about the nature of freedom, choice, truth and the individual are brought down to an accessible and stimulating level.” – Winston-Salem Journal

“This work is an appealing invitation for listeners to use more scrutiny regarding their won actions as well as those of politicians and media personalities. The depth and total absence of righteousness in the author’s writing and vocal tone make this an essential lesson for anyone interested in promoting individual virtue and social justice.” – AudioFile

--This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

From AudioFile

The author's friendly voice and relaxed tone work well in delivering his accessible ideas on the foundations of everyday morality. His meta-analysis of how we make moral judgments describes three possible goals for individual actions and public policy--practical utilitarianism, the preservation of individual rights, and the optimizing of the collective good. This work is an appealing invitation for listeners to use more scrutiny regarding their own actions as well as those of politicians and media personalities. The depth and total absence of righteousness in the author's writing and vocal tone make this an essential lesson for anyone interested in promoting individual virtue and social justice. T.W. © AudioFile 2010, Portland, Maine --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

1. DOING THE RIGHT THING
In the summer of 2004, Hurricane Charley roared out of the Gulf of Mexico and swept across Florida to the Atlantic Ocean. The storm claimed twenty-two lives and caused $11 billion in damage.1 It also left in its wake a debate about price gouging.
At a gas station in Orlando, they were selling two-dollar bags of ice for ten dollars. Lacking power for refrigerators or air-conditioning in the middle of August, many people had little choice but to pay up. Downed trees heightened demand for chain saws and roof repairs. Contractors offered to clear two trees off a homeowner’s roof—for $23,000. Stores that normally sold small household generators for $250 were now asking $2,000. A seventy-seven-year-old woman fleeing the hurricane with her elderly husband and handicapped daughter was charged $160 per night for a motel room that normally goes for $40.2
Many Floridians were angered by the inflated prices. “After Storm Come the Vultures,” read a headline in USA Today. One resident, told it would cost $10,500 to remove a fallen tree from his roof, said it was wrong for people to “try to capitalize on other people’s hardship and misery.” Charlie Crist, the state’s attorney general, agreed: “It is astounding to me, the level of greed that someone must have in their soul to be willing to take advantage of someone suffering in the wake of a hurricane.”3
Florida has a law against price gouging, and in the aftermath of the hurricane, the attorney general’s office received more than two thousand complaints. Some led to successful lawsuits. A Days Inn in West Palm Beach had to pay $70,000 in penalties and restitution for overcharging customers.4
But even as Crist set about enforcing the price-gouging law, some economists argued that the law—and the public outrage—were misconceived. In medieval times, philosophers and theologians believed that the exchange of goods should be governed by a “just price,” determined by tradition or the intrinsic value of things. But in market societies, the economists observed, prices are set by supply and demand. There is no such thing as a “just price.”
Thomas Sowell, a free-market economist, called price gouging an “emotionally powerful but economically meaningless expression that most economists pay no attention to, because it seems too confused to bother with.” Writing in the Tampa Tribune, Sowell sought to explain “how ‘price gouging’ helps Floridians.” Charges of price gouging arise “when prices are significantly higher than what people have been used to,” Sowell wrote. But “the price levels that you happen to be used to” are not morally sacrosanct. They are no more “special or ‘fair’ than other prices” that market conditions—including those prompted by a hurricane—may bring about.5
Higher prices for ice, bottled water, roof repairs, generators, and motel rooms have the advantage, Sowell argued, of limiting the use of such things by consumers and increasing incentives for suppliers in far-off places to provide the goods and ser vices most needed in the hurricane’s aftermath. If ice fetches ten dollars a bag when Floridians are facing power outages in the August heat, ice manufacturers will find it worth their while to produce and ship more of it. There is nothing unjust about these prices, Sowell explained; they simply reflect the value that buyers and sellers choose to place on the things they exchange.6
Jeff Jacoby, a pro-market commentator writing in the Boston Globe, argued against price-gouging laws on similar grounds: “It isn’t gouging to charge what the market will bear. It isn’t greedy or brazen. It’s how goods and ser vices get allocated in a free society.” Jacoby acknowledged that the “price spikes are infuriating, especially to someone whose life has just been thrown into turmoil by a deadly storm.” But public anger is no justification for interfering with the free market. By providing incentives for suppliers to produce more of the needed goods, the seemingly exorbitant prices “do far more good than harm.” His conclusion: “Demonizing vendors won’t speed Florida’s recovery. Letting them go about their business will.”7
Attorney General Crist (a Republican who would later be elected governor of Florida) published an op-ed piece in the Tampa paper defending the law against price gouging: “In times of emergency, government cannot remain on the sidelines while people are charged unconscionable prices as they flee for their lives or seek the basic commodities for their families after a hurricane.”8 Crist rejected the notion that these “unconscionable” prices reflected a truly free exchange:
This is not the normal free market situation where willing buyers freely elect to enter into the marketplace and meet willing sellers, where a price is agreed upon based on supply and demand. In an emergency, buyers under duress have no freedom. Their purchases of necessities like safe lodging are forced.9
The debate about price gouging that arose in the aftermath of Hurricane Charley raises hard questions of morality and law: Is it wrong for sellers of goods and ser vices to take advantage of a natural disaster by charging whatever the market will bear? If so, what, if anything, should the law do about it? Should the state prohibit price gouging, even if doing so interferes with the freedom of buyers and sellers to make whatever deals they choose?
Welfare, Freedom, and Virtue
These questions are not only about how individuals should treat one another. They are also about what the law should be, and about how society should be organized. They are questions about justice. To answer them, we have to explore the meaning of justice. In fact, we’ve already begun to do so. If you look closely at the price-gouging debate, you’ll notice that the arguments for and against price-gouging laws revolve around three ideas: maximizing welfare, respecting freedom, and promoting virtue. Each of these ideas points to a different way of thinking about justice.
The standard case for unfettered markets rests on two claims—one about welfare, the other about freedom. First, markets promote the welfare of society as a whole by providing incentives for people to work hard supplying the goods that other people want. (In common parlance, we often equate welfare with economic prosperity, though welfare is a broader concept that can include noneconomic aspects of social well-being.) Second, markets respect individual freedom; rather than impose a certain value on goods and ser vices, markets let people choose for themselves what value to place on the things they exchange.
Not surprisingly, the opponents of price-gouging laws invoke these two familiar arguments for free markets. How do defenders of price gouging laws respond? First, they argue that the welfare of society as whole is not really served by the exorbitant prices charged in hard times. Even if high prices call forth a greater supply of goods, this benefit has to be weighed against the burden such prices impose on those least able to afford them. For the affluent, paying inflated prices for a gallon of gas or a motel room in a storm may be an annoyance; but for those of modest means, such prices pose a genuine hardship, one that might lead them to stay in harm’s way rather than flee to safety. Proponents of price-gouging laws argue that any estimate of the general welfare must include the pain and suffering of those who may be priced out of basic necessities during an emergency.
Second, defenders of price-gouging laws maintain that, under certain conditions, the free market is not truly free. As Crist points out, “buyers under duress have no freedom. Their purchases of necessities like safe lodging are forced.” If you’re fleeing a hurricane with your family, the exorbitant price you pay for gas or shelter is not really a voluntary exchange. It’s something closer to extortion. So to decide whether price-gouging laws are justified, we need to assess these competing accounts of welfare and of freedom.
But we also need to consider one further argument. Much public support for price-gouging laws comes from something more visceral than welfare or freedom. People are outraged at “vultures” who prey on the desperation of others and want them punished—not rewarded with windfall profits. Such sentiments are often dismissed as atavistic emotions that should not interfere with public policy or law. As Jacoby writes, “demonizing vendors won’t speed Florida’s recovery.”10
But the outrage at price-gougers is more than mindless anger. It gestures at a moral argument worth taking seriously. Outrage is the special kind of anger you feel when you believe that people are getting things they don’t deserve. Outrage of this kind is anger at injustice.
Crist touched on the moral source of the outrage when he described the “greed that someone must have in their soul to be willing to take advantage of someone suffering in the wake of a hurricane.” He did not explicitly connect this observation to price-gouging laws. But implicit in his comment is something like the following argument, which might be called the virtue argument:
Greed is a vice, a bad way of being, especially when it makes people oblivious to the suffering of others. More than a personal vice, it is at odds with civic virtue. In times of trouble, a good society pulls together. Rather than press for maximum advantage, people look out for one another. A society in which people exploit their neighbors for financial gain in times of crisis is not a good society. Excessive greed is therefore a vice that a good society should discourage if it can. Pricegouging laws cannot banish greed, but they can at least restrain its most brazen expression, and signal society’s disapp... --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

From Booklist

Sandel, a Harvard law professor, effortlessly integrates common concerns of individuals with topics as varied as abortion, affirmative action, and family loyalties within the modern theories and perspectives on freedom. He reviews philosophical thought from the ancient to more modern political philosophers, including Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. Sandel critiques three ways of thinking about justice: a utilitarian perspective that seeks the greatest happiness for the greatest number; the connection of justice to freedom with contrast between what he calls the laissez-faire camp that tends to be market libertarians and the fairness camp with an egalitarian slant that acknowledges the need for market regulation; and justice tied to virtue and pursuit of the good life. Although the last is generally associated with the cultural and political Right, he exposes connections across political lines. Sandel reveals how perspectives on justice are connected to a deeper and reasoned analysis, a moral engagement in politics, and a counterintuitive conclusion in modern politics. Whether or not readers agree with Sandel’s conclusions, they will appreciate the encouragement to self-examination on the most mundane topics. --Vernon Ford --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

ASIN ‏ : ‎ B002Q7H7L0
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 1st edition (September 15, 2009)
Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 15, 2009
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 1102 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 322 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

Best Sellers Rank: #39,894 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #10 in Political Philosophy (Kindle Store)
- #23 in Political History (Kindle Store)
- #23 in Ethics & Morality

Customer Reviews:
2,781 ratings

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

Michael J. Sandel

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Michael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard University. He has been described as a “rock-star moralist” (Newsweek) and “the world’s most influential living philosopher.” (New Statesman) Sandel’s books--on justice, ethics, democracy, and markets--have been translated into more than 30 languages. His legendary course “Justice” was the first Harvard course to be made freely available online and has been viewed by tens of millions. His BBC series “The Global Philosopher” explores the ethical issues lying behind the headlines with participants from around the world.

Customer reviews

5 star		76%
4 star		13%
3 star		6%
2 star		2%
1 star		3%

How customer reviews and ratings work

Reviews with images

See all customer images

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Mike

Clear, Compelling, and Comprehensive

Reviewed in the United States on April 22, 2020

Verified Purchase

I love books that I feel like I can talk to or argue with. This book makes it incredibly fun to do so by posing some of the most interesting moral dilemmas that we’ve conceived since Aristotle’s time.

For someone who doesn’t always agree with moral individualists, the author discusses this philosophical tradition in an extremely clear and unbiased way. This makes the force of his communitarian arguments at the end of the book all the stronger. The end will leave you with hope that there is a philosophical foundation for a sorely needed invigoration of American public services and civic life.

If you can only read two books on moral and political philosophy, this and The Righteous Mind are essentially everything you need to know, in my opinion.

17 people found this helpful

Helpful

Tina

Helpful for beginners, but so circular and repetitive that it's frustrating for those familiar with the theories.

Reviewed in the United States on May 12, 2018

Verified Purchase

The point of the book is to introduce some pretty basic jurisprudence/moral philosophy, and the idea that common social issues should be argued with morals and ethics--in fact, they can't be excluded from discussions. If you're not familiar with a lot of the basic philosophical theories that are referenced in socio-political discussions (Kant, Utilitarianism, Aristotle, etc.), the book will be helpful.

I found that Sandel repeats himself frequently, and uses a lot of short stories to explain a concept. It felt more circular and kind of energy-draining to try and find out the point he was trying to make. Additionally, he doesn't go into any real depth with the theories, just mentions a few basic points and then goes right into another hypothetical.

18 people found this helpful

Helpful

0101101

NO Kindle page numbering.

Reviewed in the United States on February 13, 2018

Verified Purchase

5 stars for the book; ZERO stars to Amazon for the prominent claims that the Kindle version includes page numbers.
--> It does not.
I like my Kindle and I hate location numbers - part of the reason I chose an e-version of this book was Amazon's claims that it includes actual page numbers. It doesn't and they are not an option.

NOTE: I am wide open to being proven wrong and would welcome it; if anyone replies with a way to see pages, I will take it all back.

19 people found this helpful

Helpful

Andrew

A detriment to society and philosophy alike.

Reviewed in the United States on March 12, 2019

Verified Purchase

Sandel is a leftist sweetheart who uses circular reasoning and conformation biases to back up his own flawed reasoning. If you would like to hear Sandel oversimplify issues so he can then easily discredit them read this book. If you want to learn something about philosophy, yourself, or what Justice is. Don't read this book.

17 people found this helpful

Helpful

Amy R.

Not "light" reading but a page-turner nevertheless. Superb intro to moral philosophy

Reviewed in the United States on August 10, 2014

Verified Purchase

ScienceThrillers Review: I never took Sandel’s famous core curriculum course while I was at Harvard, but many undergraduates did. There was something special about that class: people talked about it, and kept talking about it. Sandel was accomplishing what all educators wish they could. He was lighting a fire.

Now, years later, Professor Sandel has written a book based on the content of that course which has now become famous beyond the ivy walls. Which means I had a second chance to be his student. (Or third chance, if you consider I rejected the idea of enrolling in the online edX version of Justice as too onerous.)

No one would describe Justice as a beach read, but I did read it on vacation, an advantage that allowed me to focus more fully and not abandon the book for too-long intervals. It is a page-turner in its own way. Sandel’s gift is two-fold. First, he streamlines the key arguments and perspectives of a select group of great moral philosophers. The ideas aren’t dumbed down, but they are artfully reduced to their essence. Second, he uses real-world anecdotes to illustrate the application of the various philosophies, and equally important, he explains the intellectual challenges made to each. (Which allowed me to pretend that’s exactly what I was thinking and I was glad he brought it up.)

Moral issues used in the book include the famous runaway trolley problem, outrage over the bailout, exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, a consensual cannibalism case from Germany, the voluntary military, surrogate pregnancy, selling kidneys, Bill Clinton and Monica, affirmative action, reparations, evacuating Ethiopian Jews, buying American, and much more. In each case, although Sandel is clearly a contemporary American liberal, he avoids taking a decisive stand but works through the logical conclusion of the relevant moral philosophy.

Thus about 80% of the book is an engaging, readable distillation of important ideas about justice, society, and morality. In the last 20% or so, Sandel goes beyond teaching and presents his own argument for a new approach to justice in our times. Once you wrap your head around it, you realize that he is advocating for a revolutionary re-thinking of the moral neutrality which has been the unwritten goal of justice in America for some decades. His is a bracing, risky gambit–but once you’ve read the whole book, you’ll see why it may be the only way to save modern politics.

A remarkable, compact book that will stimulate the logic circuits of your brain and leave you pondering Big Questions.

Unusual words: utilitarianism; Jeremy Bentham; John Stuart Mill; libertarianism; universal rights; laissez-faire; pure practical reason; Immanuel Kant; categorical imperative; intelligible realm; John Rawls; moral desert; Aristotle; telos

If you like Justice, you might like:
The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt.

45 people found this helpful

Helpful

JT Dimmitt

Justice just misses, but that's Ok.

Reviewed in the United States on March 4, 2022

Verified Purchase

Michael J. Sandel has brought the ancient question of Justice to the 21st century. The ideas of Justice have been bought forth by Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and others in antiquity. However, they never asked about price gouging, corporate bailouts, or street trollies out of control. It is a good read if you can over look the flaws in some of the arguments.

When using the street trolly example, he offers the option of throwing an innocent person off the bridge to save six other people. That is murder. Whether or not it saves others is irrelevant after that point. The same is true with price gouging after the hurricane in Florida. Prices go up after natural disasters: Florida has hurricanes, Kansas has tornados, and California has wild fires. Gouging is a perception in many cases. If price gouging is a perception then it is not a Justice question but a logistics one.

Michael J. Sandel has written a decent book on the question of Justice. It is also a good place to start a conversation. But there is a reason why Aristotle, Plato, Hobbes, Machiavelli, and Aquinas are still read today.

Helpful

Top reviews from other countries

angrypierre

Enlightening but perhaps not engaging

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 1, 2021

Verified Purchase

There is plenty i liked about this book. Daniel systematically outlined various aspects of political philosophy and uses easy-to-follow examples relevant to everyday life to illustrate his points. I have come away with a much deeper understanding of contemporary political discourse, and some hope that there may be a better way for public debate to go forward.

The problem is that on the page it can be really quite dry. There were some sections where my attention started to wander, and it took a quick re-read to make sure I'd actually taken it in. I believe you can still find Sandel's lecture course on justice (on which this book is largely based) on YouTube. There his easy charm and the presence of an engaged and questioning audience of bright young minds really bring this stuff to life. I'd recommend giving that a watch as a companion to this book.

3 people found this helpful

Robert ‘Bob’ Macespera

Very good

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 16, 2020

Verified Purchase

This is an excellent book on the always tricky subject of "what's the right thing to do", or simply "what's right or wrong". The author is an eminent scholar and the range of his knowledge is remarkable. However, he manages to turn a complex matter into a very clear book, helped by very clear and useful examples.
Some authors appear constantly, yet they've never been so clear, such as Kant or Mill's utilitarism.
Equally, some notions, such as justice, fairness, liberty and other similar ones, are explained beautifully and, importantly, in their different meanings throughout history.
A very good book who repays repeated readings.

5 people found this helpful

WeAreWhatWeRead

Universal appeal

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 1, 2015

Verified Purchase

I cannot recommend 'Justice' highly enough. A Harvard professor, so presumably more at home in the rarefied world of academia, Michael Sandel has nevertheless the rare talent of turning lofty ideas into accessible and engaging discussions. Furthermore, while reading his book we can't help but start wondering about other concepts too, such as ethics, freedom, the distribution of wealth, or the role played by both personal responsibility and culture/society in our individual lives (which is the dominant one?) All in all, I'd say this is one of the best and most useful texts I've ever read.

As another reviewer said, 'Justice' makes us think, and there is no higher praise for any book, of any genre. It is true that its most examples and debates are USA-centred and highly specific to the Americans, but don't let that put you off, the questions this exceptional book poses are universal and so, to the intelligent reader, pretty much everything in here will be highly relevant no matter where we live. And if you're looking to form a well-rounded, informed view of the world we live in, you could do worse than reading also Sandel's What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets and the not at all insignificant Globalization: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) by Steger.

6 people found this helpful

Cols

Excellent book, but i may need to read again to fully understand it all

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 21, 2021

Verified Purchase

This was a really good book. It certainly made me think and if i am honest, I didn't understand all of it. But i liked the fact it asks some good moral questions which makes the reader have to think. It does read in parts like an academic book, but it's also has good chapters and headings which helped me. I would recommend, a good book !

BeMo

Changes how I view moral dilemmas

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 7, 2013

Verified Purchase

Michael Sandel caught my attention with the BBC series on justice. Then I discovered the 12 Havard lectures on iTunesU / youtube and the book and so bought the book; it has has changed how I view moral delimmas. The first chapter discusses a dilemma involving the needs of many vs. the needs of one, and by re-casting the problem in different ways most of us change our minds on what is right. As the author intended, the book shows us how to "morally reflect" different views from different schools of thought, and how to seek the principal that we apply in making judgements (you can read this part in the free download of the the Kindle edition). Thereafter Michael descends deeper into the differing schools - utilitarianism, liberalism, Kant, Rawls, and Aristotle. The book closely mirrors the video lectures with little deviation so by coupling both the material sinks in. I myself am not a philosopher; but after reading this I feel a much keener interest in philosophy, particularly moral philosophy that has surprised me. Throughout the book the author remains neutral on the different schools, showing the rational for, objections against, and counters against objections; but the last couple of chapters he shows his cards and does take sides and explains why. I read this book, and when I got to the tougher chapters such as on Kant, I read each chapter twice; then read the whole book again. I can't say I've done this with many books. For me an easy 5 out of 5.

5 people found this helpful

See all reviews