Res Publica 16 (3):281-298 (2010)

Gabriel Wollner
Universität Bayreuth
John Rawls famously claims that ‘justice is the first virtue of social institutions’. On one of its readings, this remark seems to suggest that social institutions are essential for obligations of justice to arise. The spirit of this interpretation has recently sparked a new debate about the grounds of justice. What are the conditions that generate principles of distributive justice? I am interested in a specific version of this question. What conditions generate egalitarian principles of distributive justice and give rise to equality as a demand of justice? My paper focuses on relationalist answers to this question. Advocates of relationalism assume that ‘principles of distributive justice have a relational basis’, in the sense that ‘practice mediated relations in which individuals stand condition the content, scope and justification of those principles’. To say that principles of justice are ‘based’ on and ‘conditioned’ by practice mediated relations is ambiguous. I will here be concerned with advocates of what I call the relationalist requirement , viz. positions which assume that ‘practice mediated relations’ constitute a necessary existence condition for principles of egalitarian distributive justice. Relationalists who endorse this view come in different varieties. My focus is on relationalists that view social and political institutions as the relevant ‘practice mediated relation’. The question at stake, then, is this: Are institutionally mediated relations a necessary condition for equality to arise as a demand of justice? Strong relationalists of the institutionalist cast, call them advocates of the institutionalist requirement , differ in important respects. They argue about what set of institutions is foundationally significant, and they disagree on why only that institutional relation gives rise to egalitarian obligations of justice. My paper engages two ways of arguing for the institutionalist requirement : Julius’s framing argument and Andrea Sangiovanni’s reciprocity argument . The issue at stake are the grounds of egalitarian justice and I will argue that the institutionalist requirement is mistaken. It is not the case that egalitarian obligations of distributive justice arise only between and solely in virtue of individuals sharing a common institution
Keywords Grounds of justice  Relationalism  Institutions  Basic structure  Equality
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11158-010-9125-z
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,823
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Justice as Fairness: A Restatement.John Rawls (ed.) - 2001 - Harvard University Press.
World Poverty and Human Rights.Thomas Pogge - 2002 - Ethics and International Affairs 19 (1):1-7.
The Problem of Global Justice.Thomas Nagel - 2005 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2):113-147.
Distributive Justice, State Coercion, and Autonomy.Michael Blake - 2001 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 30 (3):257-296.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Global Egalitarianism.Chris Armstrong - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (1):155-171.
Global Justice and Global Relations.Kok-Chor Tan - 2010 - Social Theory and Practice 36 (3):499-514.
Why Relational Egalitarians Should Care About Distributions.Christian Schemmel - 2011 - Social Theory and Practice 37 (3):365-390.
Contractualism, Reciprocity, and Egalitarian Justice.Jonathan Quong - 2007 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (1):75-105.
Global Justice, Global Institutions.Daniel M. Weinstock (ed.) - 2007 - University of Calgary Press.
Backing Away From Equality.Steven Wall - 2012 - Criminal Justice Ethics 31 (2):96-105.
Reciprocity, Relationships, and Distributive Justice.Andrew Lister - 2013 - Social Theory and Practice 39 (1):70-94.
How Egalitarian is Rawls's Theory of Justice?Ian Hunt - 2010 - Philosophical Papers 39 (2):155-181.


Added to PP index

Total views
104 ( #98,256 of 2,425,992 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #349,733 of 2,425,992 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes