Module 7

Virtue Ethics II
Distributive Justice and Care Ethics
Lesson 1: Distributive Justice
Lesson 1.1: Justice as a Virtue
Lesson 1.2: Kinds of Justice
Lesson 1.3: Theories of Distributive Justice
Lesson 2: Ethics of Care
Lesson 2.1: Overview of Care Ethics
Lesson 2.2: Contributions of Gilligan and Noddings
Lesson 2.2: Some Criticisms
 Lesson 1: Distributive Justice

Lesson 1.1: Justice as a Virtue

Plato: Justice is the master virtue of individuals and states. It is achieved when
the fundamental elements of the individual soul and the state are functioning
excellently and harmoniously.
• Each element, when functioning well, achieves a certain virtue. When all these elements are
functioning well and in harmony with one another, the virtue of justice is achieved.
Individual Soul State Virtue
Reason Rulers Wisdom
Spirit / Passion Military / Soldiers Courage
Appetite / Desire Merchants / Workers Temperance
Aristotle: Justice as a virtue has 2 senses: (1) general sense, where justice is
defined as lawfulness; (2) particular sense, where justice is defined as fairness.
• General Sense: The state (ideally) seeks to cultivate good habits (character traits)
among its citizens through its laws. Justice, in this regard, is the complete virtue
achieved when citizens abide by the (virtue-cultivating) laws of the state.
• Particular Sense: Justice is also the virtue achieved when citizens are fair in
distributing benefits and burdens (distributive justice), and in correcting injustices
(corrective justice or justice in rectification)

John Rawls: “Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of

systems of thought.”
 Lesson 1.2: Kinds of Justice

1. Retributive Justice
• Also called “retaliatory justice,” refers to the fair imposition of punishments and
penalties on those guilty of performing wrongful acts.
2. Compensatory Justice
• Refers to the fair way of compensating people, usually by providing them certain
goods for what they lost as a result of wrongful actions done to them.
3. Distributive Justice
• Refers to the fair distribution or allocation of benefits (desirable things such as
income) and burdens (undesirable things such as workload and sacrifices)
4. Procedural Justice
• Refers to the fairness in the process by which decisions are made, especially in
resolving disputes and allocating resources; usually associated with due process.
 Lesson 1.2: Theories of Distributive Justice
• Distributive justice is the most fundamental kind of justice for it
accommodates the other kinds and is essential involved in each of them.
• Punishments are burdens, compensations are benefits, fair process is a standard of just
distribution.
• When is a distribution just?
When the distribution is based on: Theory of Justice
Equality Egalitarianism
Contribution Capitalist Justice
Needs Socialist Justice
Effort Justice as Fair Opportunity
Maximum aggregate good Utilitarian Justice
Principles fairly chosen Justice as Fairness
Respect for moral (property) rights Libertarian Justice
1. Egalitarian Justice
• Political Egalitarianism: equality of rights
• Economic Egalitarianism: equality of resources
• Luck Egalitarianism: inequalities may be fair or unfair; unfair inequalities are
those due to factors beyond our control (for which we are not responsible). E.g.,
inequalities due to race, gender, etc.
2. Capitalist Justice
• The greater the contribution, the greater the share in the distribution.

3. Socialist Justice
• The greater the need, the greater the share in the distribution.

4. Justice as Fair Opportunity

• The greater the effort, the greater the share in the distribution.
5. Utilitarian Justice
• Any form of distribution (based on need, merit, effort, or some other) is just so
long as it promotes the maximum aggregate welfare of all persons involved.
6. Justice as Fairness
• The just distribution is one that follows principles chosen by those involved in
the distribution in a fair manner (i.e., not biased to one’s “situation in life”).
• John Rawls: (a) principles of equality-- basic rights and liberties should be equal; (b)
principle of fair inequality– socio-economic inequalities should promote the interests of
least advantaged members of society and provide equal opportunities to all.

7. Libertarian Justice
• The just distribution is one that respects the property rights of those involved in
the distribution. Acquisition of ownership of resources and its transfer to others
are done in ways that do not violate moral rights.
 Lesson 2: Ethics of Care

Lesson 2.1: Overview of Care Ethics

1. It criticizes the rationalist and universalist approaches of Kantian and
Utilitarian theories for being distant from the concrete human realities of
the moral experience.
2. As a form of virtue ethics, it primarily seeks to develop certain moral
attributes. It, however, criticizes Aristotelian virtue ethics for being biased in
favor of male-oriented virtues such as justice, courage, self-control, and
autonomy.
3. It developed from the writings of women psychologists and philosophers,
which gave expression to the moral experiences of women. As such, it has
been associated with feminist philosophy. Some, however, argue that it is
not gender-specific as care is a universal moral inclination.
4. It also developed from the criticisms of feminist moral philosophers against
traditional moral theories. Such criticisms include the following:
• Whereas in the traditional moral theories, morality is designed to govern the
interactions of autonomous strangers (or impartial persons), feminist accounts
of moral theory suggest that the focus of the moral life is primarily one of
preserving human relationships.
• While traditional moral theory emphasizes impartiality and universality (morality
should be dispassionate, objective, purely rational) feminist moral theory
emphasizes our desire to care for persons.
 Lesson 2.2: Contributions of Gilligan and Noddings
• There are many scholars who contributed to the development of care ethics. Two of the
earlier ones were Carol Gilligan, a psychologist, and Nel Noddings, a feminist philosopher.

Some Views Advanced by Gilligan

• Morality should not be looked at merely in terms of rules and justice, wherein the
focus is on how to balance conflicting rights fairly or justly.
• Males and females differ in their basic life orientation, particularly in conceptions
of morality.
• Males typically have a justice or rights orientation because of their individualistic and
separate conceptions of self. The male’s moral viewpoint involves issues of conflicting rights.
Females typically have a care orientation because their perception of the self as connected
to and interdependent with others.... Thus, females view morality as involving issues of
conflicting responsibilities.
• Females go through different series of moral stages than males do (as shown by
an experiment on the Heinz’ Dilemma):

• Kohlberg’s theory only represents the male’s moral perspective.

• Pre-Conventional Stage: Right Action as What Brings Pleasure or Reward to Oneself
• Conventional Stage: Right Action as Loyalty to Others and Respect for Law and Custom
• Post-Conventional Stage: Right Action as Following Abstract/General Moral Principles

• The female stages of moral development (accdg. to Gilligan)

• Level One: Individual Survival Orientation
• First Transition: From Selfishness to Responsibility
• Level Two: Goodness as Self-sacrifice
• Second Transition: From Goodness to Truth
• Level Three: The Morality of Nonviolence
Some Views Advanced by Noddings
• Following Hume, morality is founded upon and rooted in feelings.
• ”Oughts” are built on “wants.” Ethical caring (what I ought to do) is
dependent on natural caring (what I want to do).
• “I ought” has its origin in natural caring where “what I want to do” and “what
I and others judge I ought to do” are indistinguishable.
• Ex. “When my infant cries at night, I not only feel that I must do something, but
I want to do something.” the ‘I must’ is not a dutiful imperative, not yet a
moral/ethical ought. In contrast, the ‘I want’ is based on love and caring. Taking
care of one’s child is first a natural act, and it is from this connection where it
derives its morality.”
• Our inclination toward and attention to that which is moral derives from
caring. The impulse to act on behalf of another in need is itself innate, and in
caring, one accepts the natural impulse to act on behalf of the other.
• Caring-relationship structure: one-caring, one-cared-for; both have an
obligation to care reciprocally (similar to Buber’s I-Thou).
• Noddings: “Whatever I do in life, whomever I meet, I am first and always the one-
caring or one cared-for. I do not assume roles unless I become an actor …
whenever encounter occurs, I must meet the other as one-caring.”
• Care is foundational to ethics and definitely opposed to the impartialist
masculine view of ethics.
• Impartial principles are inadequate because they require you to extract from a
situation the very details that may be morally relevant.
• Against universifiability—because this assumes sameness.
• We are abstracting away from concrete situations, losing the qualities or factors
that gave rise to the moral question in the situation.
• Moral judgments must be done on a case-to-case basis.
• Each person and each situation is different from others that the general rules
provide little or no guidance.
• The task in making moral judgments is not primarily to judge, but rather, to
heighten moral sensitivity and perception. The focus is to consider them in the
light of care.
• We cannot exist, cannot be even who we are, in isolation from caring
relationships with others.
• Howard Curzer summarizes the ethics of care: “one should act partially (rather
than impartially), according to one’s passion (rather than just one’s reason) for
particular people (rather than for people in general).”
Some Criticisms
1. Some claim that care ethics projects a kind of slave morality that ascribes
value to the oppression of women. (The philosopher Frederick Nietzsche
calls the tendency of oppressed peoples to develop moral theories that
reaffirm subservient traits as virtues as “slave morality.”)
2. Care ethics may not really liberate women from their oppression, for it may
just reinforce the limited gender role of women to care for others. Care
ethics needs the elements of justice, self-development, and autonomy
incorporated into it for it to promote real gender equality and liberation of
women from oppression.
3. Care ethics is also criticized for being parochial, giving more value on the
needs of the particular people one has close affinity or relation to.
GEETHIC Blueprint Presentations
Prepared by: Napoleon M. Mabaquiao, Jr
Department of Philosophy
DLSU, Term 3, AY 2019-20

Reference: Evangelista, F. and N. Mabaquiao. Ethics: Theories and Applications

(Anvil Publishing Inc., 2020).