What is justice - some notes

The answers on my latest video were more based on specific philosophers and ideas than normal, so I thought I'd do a kind of notes/bibliography thing here..

Bunyin - This is based on Peter Singerā€™s ā€œFamine, Affluence, and Moralityā€, I gave it to be Bunyin purely because Singer is Australian and so far being Australian is Bunyinā€™s defining character trait.

Robot - Again inspired by Peter Singer, this time his idea of ā€œspeciesismā€. Singer argues that animals are worthy of moral consideration because of their ability to suffer. I gave this thought to a robot because I find the question of what would make non-organic consciousness worthy of moral consideration interesting.

Mother Nature - I donā€™t really have a specific reference for this as itā€™s more of a nod to a whole area of discussion, ā€œintergenerational justiceā€ is the search term you need if you want to find a whole bunch of philosophers talking about it.

Father Time - Again a nod to a whole area of discussion, but the debate started by the introduction of affirmative action is a good starting point: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/ 

Leviathan - The character here is based on the original cover of Thomas Hobbesā€™s Leviathan, but social contract theory is a pretty common enlightenment approach to the question of how state authority can be legitimised (Rousseau and Locke being two other key figures in this tradition).

Elf - All ideologies basically say that the violence necessary to enforce the institutions they favour is justified violence, but libertarians are kind of unique in how often they appeal to non-aggression to justify their system. Itā€™s essentially circular, ā€œmy system is the best because itā€™s non-aggressive, if you define aggression according to the principles of my systemā€. Here is a libertarian admitting this (reason number 5): https://www.libertarianism.org/blog/six-reasons-libertarians-should-reject-non-aggression-principle

Nessy: The mixing labour idea is common in theories of justice centred around the idea of private property, but John Locke is probably the classic example. The Irn Bru bit is a play on Nozickā€™s consideration of labour mixing arguments in ā€œAnarchy, State, and Utopiaā€.

Beckoning Cat: The tension between the belief that we shouldnā€™t morally judge people for things that are not in their control and the fact that we regularly do is explored by writings on ā€œMoral Luckā€. Thomas Nagel was my first introduction to this topic.

Dragon: The thought experiment is John Rawlā€™s original position, and the resulting principle is the difference principle. John Rawls is more radical than he gets credit for, he explicitly says free-market capitalism and welfare-state capitalism do not satisfy the difference principle.

Godzilla: This is G. A. Cohenā€™s criticism of the difference principle, phrased in a way that I hope evokes Marxā€™s line from Critique of the Gotha Programme - ā€œFrom each according to his ability, to each according to his needsā€.

King Kong: A basic marxist/materialist interpretation of justice with a nod to the discussion of empty signifiers you find in Laclau and Zizek.