Negotiating with the ‘Principles of Social Justice’

Abstract

David Miller is a lifelong academic by profession and political scientist. His famous work ‘Principles of Social Justice’ (1999) analyses the basic tenets of social justice as well as guaranteed circumstances that are relevant to an action. This work explores the relationship between theory and experience in a globalist view of social sciences, in the form of a dialogue. It focuses on questions of social justice and experiences of social reality. David Miller argues that only those who have lived as disadvantaged can represent them accurately. Be it classical political theory or contemporary political theory, Miller’s theory remains significant even today. Needless to say, both classical and contemporary theorists try to establish their theories by revolving around social justice. He proposed the idea of socially ‘just’ society. David Miller provides a good definition for that, by arguing that social justice prepared positive boundaries. Generally, social justice examines justice in terms of the distribution of resources within a society. The book is divided into 12 chapters in order to suggest 12 lenses to identify the facts about social justice. Each focuses on defining the evolution of justice and how these principles are commonly understood. The first part engages with the genealogy of the theory of justice at a concrete level. Chapter second offers a historical interpretation of the theory of justice. The most worthwhile part of the books is ‘Two Cheers of Meritocracy’, this part reflecting the nuanced justifications on equity (Merit and Desert). The defined justice is a social virtue. It tells us how to order human relationships, what we must rightly do for one another. Miller attempted to structure all things by his definition, saying, ‘how the good and bad things in life should be distributed among the members of a human society’ (p. 1). In the following chapters, he substantiates his notion to numerous socio-political problems and contexts emphasizing the problematic balance between just procedure and outcome.