Abstract
This paper considers the relation between philosophical discussions of, and social-scientific research into popular beliefs about, distributive justice. The first part sets out the differences and tensions between the two perspectives, identifying considerations which tend to lead adherents of each discipline to regard the other as irrelevant to its concerns. The second discusses four reasons why social scientists might benefit from philosophy: problems in identifying inconsistency, the fact that non-justice considerations might underlie distributive judgments, the way in which different principles of justice can yield the same concrete distributive judgments, and the ambiguity of key terms. The third part distinguishes and evaluates three versions of the claim that normative theorising about justice can profit from empirical research into public opinion: that its findings are food for thought, that they amount to feasibility constraints, and that they are constitutive of normatively justified principles of justice. The view that popular opinion about justice has a strongly constitutive role to play in justifying principles of distributive justice stricto sensu is rejected, but it is argued that what the people think (and what they can reasonably be expected to come to think) on distributive matters can be an important factor for the political theorist to take into account, for reasons of legitimacy, or feasibility, or both.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Bell, J. and E. Schokkaert, Interdisciplinary theory and research on justice, in K. R. Scherer (ed.) Justice: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 237–253.
Burgoyne, C., A. Swift, and G. Marshall, Inconsistency in Beliefs about Distributive Justice: A Cautionary Note, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 23, (1993),pp. 327–342.
Campbell, T., Humanity before Justice, British Journal of Political Science 4, (1974),pp. 1–16.
Dunn, J., Political Obligation in its Historical Context, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1980.
Elster, J., Local Justice, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1992.
Elster, J., The Empirical Study of Justice, in D. Miller and M. Walzer (eds.) Justice,Pluralism and Equality, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995, pp. 81–98.
Estlund, D., The Persistent Puzzle of the Minority Democrat, American Philosophical Quarterly 26, (1989), pp. 143–151.
Estlund, D., The Survival of Egalitarian Justice in John Rawls's Political Liberalism, Journal of Political Philosophy 4, (1996), pp. 68–78.
Fishkin, J., The Voice of the People: Public opinion and Democracy, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.
Frolich, N. and J.A. Oppenheimer, Choosing Justice: An Experimental Approach to Ethical Theory, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.
Galston, W., Liberal Purposes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Gaus, G.F., Justificatory Liberalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Goode, W.J., The Celebration of Heroes: Prestige as a Social Control System, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978.
Greenawalt, K., ”Truth” or Consequences, in I. Shapiro and J. W. DeCew (eds.) Nomos XXXVII Theory and Practice, New York: New York University Press, 1996, pp. 386–399.
Jackson, F. and P. Pettit, Moral Functionalism and Moral Motivation, Philosophical Quarterly 45, (1996), pp. 20–40.
Lerner, M.J., The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion, New York: Plenum Press, 1980.
Miller, D., Review Article: Recent Theories of Social Justice, British Journal of Political Science 21, (1991), pp. 371–391.
Miller, D., Distributive Justice: What the People Think, Ethics 102, (1992), pp. 555–593.
Miller, D., Review of K. Scherer (ed.) Justice: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Social Justice Research 7, (1994), pp. 167–188.
Moore, B., Injustice: The Social Bases of Obedience and Revolt, London: Macmillan, 1979.
Mulhall, S. and A. Swift, Liberals and Communitarians, (2nd ed.) Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.
Nozick, R., Anarchy, State and Utopia, Oxford: Blackwell, 1974.
Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
Rawls, J., Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.
Reis, H.T., The multidimensionality of Justice, in R. Folger (ed.) The Sense of Injustice: Social Psychological Perspectives, New York: Plenum Press, 1984, pp. 25–61.
Rorty, R., The Priority of Democracy to Philosophy, in A. Malachowski (ed.), Reading Rorty, Oxford: Blackwell, 1990, pp. 279–302.
Scheffler, S., Responsibility, Reactive Attitudes, and Liberalism in Philosophy and Politics, Philosophy and Public Affairs 21, (1992), pp. 299–323.
Strawson. P., Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays, London: Methuen, 1974.
Swift, A., G. Marshall, C. Burgoyne, and D. Routh, Distributive Justice: Does It Matter What the People Think?, in J. Kluegel et al (eds.) Social Justice and PoliticalChange: Public Opinion in Capitalist and Post-Communist States, New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1995, pp. 15–47.
Tornblom, K., The social psychology of distributive justice, in K. Scherer (ed.) 1992, pp.177–236.
Walzer, M., Philosophy and Democracy, Political Theory 9, (1981), pp. 379–399.
Walzer, M., Spheres of Justice, New York: Basic Books, 1983.
Warnke, G., Justice and Interpretation, Oxford: Blackwell, 1992.
Weber, M., Politics as a Vocation and Science as a Vocation, in H. H. Gerth and C. W. Mills, (eds), From Max Weber, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1948, pp. 77–156.
Wollheim, R., A Paradox in the Theory of Democracy, in P. Laslett and W. G. Runciman (eds.) Philosophy, Politics and Society, Second Series, Oxford: Blackwell, 1962, pp.71–87.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Swift, A. Public Opinion and Political Philosophy: The Relation between Social-Scientific and Philosophical Analyses of Distributive Justice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2, 337–363 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009903718660
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009903718660