Aristotle's notion of Justice

Author: Joshua Caesar O. Elegado, IV-BA Philosophy, Aristotle's Justice

Faculty: Mr. Silvino Balasta, Jr., MPR

Aristotle’s notion of Justice

Aristotle’s notion of Justice is comprised of two levels: the Universal and Particular. The former pertains to the universality of policies and regulations that everyone must obey in order for justice to flourish in society. Universal justice is materialized and realized in law, which every person should obey because if they do not, they will get punished. The idea of the law is to attain peace and security of people; hence, it is the epitome of universal justice. The latter pertains to the distributive attributes of justice that aim for fairness and balance in society. It is giving what is due and what is ought. One example by which particular justice is observed is through giving justice to those who are victims of robbery and theft. The victims of the said crime must be able to receive justice through giving them back their stolen properties and criminalizing the perpetrator.

The difference between Plato’s and Aristotle’s notion of justice is of two things, Plato’s model is based on the political, while Aristotle’s model is based on virtue and balance. On the issue of the ideal justice, Plato’s justice would champion over Aristotle’s. On the issue of practicality, Aristotle’s notion of justice would champion. Aristotle’s notion of justice is the system of justice that is used in today’s world for the following reasons: one, Aristotle does account for the equality of every person, meaning everyone has a right of being human in this world. Two, Aristotle accounts for equal opportunity, meaning that everyone can be different yet equal in opportunity and fairness. A person can be of the lower class but has the right to education just as the middle and elite classes are practicing.

In the time of where we are today, Aristotle’s notion of justice is the kind of justice we are currently practicing. It is because the social movement came towards the immerse advocacy for a human rights-centered society, where people are equal and free and have inherent and inviolable rights. Such a notion of rights is anchored towards justice and fairness which accounts for the capacity of man to be free without any restrictions of any kind. Our society would be so much better if we take Aristotle’s suggestions of justice on a serious note. If only the government would practice such a notion of justice, we would be able to see the respect and empowerment of human rights, that is to give every individual an opportunity to fair quality access to education, respect to the lives of every individual, a safe and secured public sphere where every person can express their freedom of expression, and the right to a fair judicial process. In the context of the Philippines, we observe the complete opposite as to what Aristotle suggested; we see the education system lack accessibility, there is little to no respect for human lives, our freedom of expression is terrorized, and the elite and the ruling classes can get away with plunders and graft for the sake of greed while the marginalized poor gets criminalized over stealing primary goods for the sake of survival.

Overall, both versions of justice have their own strengths and weakness, but in practice and relevance in the real world in today’s time, Aristotle’s notion of justice is the clear champion in the said category. Such notion of Justice must be complied with strictly in order for such notion of “justice” to indeed be called, justice.