People are faced with different situations that require decision-making everyday. No matter how small or big these decisions are, whether it be about what to wear or eat, it is important to be guided by the principles and philosophies in life one has. Philosophy, as it is commonly defined, is the love for wisdom. True philosophy, on the other hand, is the love for widsom, growing in wisdom, and applying this wisdom in life. Rational and better decisions are made when philosophy is applied, instead of decisions based on anger, pain, or fear. In the same way, a person also gets to identify and see false things that abound this world.
In chapter 2 of the book Justice: What’s the right thing to do? by Michael J. Sandel, he talks about the concepts of justice, morality, utilitarianism, and libertarianism. In chapter 2, he discusses Jeremy Bentham and his concept of utilitarianism. According to him, utilitarianism is all about maximizing happiness, which is the overall balance of pleasure over pain, and the standard for what is right or wrong is anchored on these two (Sandel, 1998, p.29). Bentham explains that humans are ruled by feelings of pain and pleasure, and that what is considered right is in the idea of maximizing pleasure while preventing pain or suffering. This belief also applies to legislators as in making policies, the happiness of the community should come first and foremost. In order for this to work, Bentham suggests adding up all the benefits then subtracting the costs, such that when the benefits are greater than the cost, then the policy should be implemented. However, Sandel argues that this reasoning presents a serious concern, as individual rights of people are not taken into consideration. Despite the implication that individuals also matter, it is only limited to every individual’s choice and how they should be counted along with everyone else’s (Sandel, 1998, p.24). This was further explained through the ‘throwing Christians to lion’ example, wherein the Romans in the past threw Christians to the lions while the crowd watches in ecstasy. Sandel further argues that the idea of calculating and comparing costs and benefits, then translating it into a single currency of value is problematic as “all values can’t be captured by a common currency of value” (Sandel, 1998, p.26). An example he provided was the case of Ford Pinto and its exploding fuel tanks. According to the case, Ford did not change the tanks of their Pinto cars as it would cause them more compared to the amount they would spend on the victims. This exhibits the problem described by Sandel, wherein a monetary value is placed on life.
Chapter 3, on the other hand, talks about libertarianism. Libertarianism, on the other hand, promotes ‘unfettered markets’ while opposing government regulation, “not in the name of economic efficiency, but in the name of human freedom” (Sandel, 1998, p.35). This exhibits the idea that everyone has a fundamental right to liberty, which means that everyone is allowed to do whatever they want to do with everything they own for so long as it doesn’t contradict with other people’s rights to exercise the same rights. For instance, in order to maximize happiness, wealth redistribution can be done by taking money from some of the richest people in America such as Oprah Winfrey and Bill Gates. The money would then be given to the needy, which would increase their utility more than it would decrease Oprah’s and Bates’s. However, if money is taken from the wealthy without them knowing it, libertarians would consider it a violation of the rich’s liberty. The book further discusses that there are three laws that the libertarians oppose: no paternism, or the law which protects people from harming themselves, such as wearing a helmet when riding a motorcycle; no morals legislation, or the which coerces people to adhere to ‘notions of virtue’ such as prostitution, which many people consider to be morally objectionable; no redistribution of income or wealth, or the law which requires people to redistribute wealth such as taxation (Sandel, 1998, p.36). The idea of taxation was further discussed by Robert Nozick, the philosopher behind libertarianism, which states that taxing someone’s earnings from labor is a violation of the person’s right as this implies that the state becomes a part-owner of the person. This reasoning, however is flawed, according to Sandel, as being taxed is different from being forced to work. A person can choose to work less if s/he wants to pay less tax, and this does not translate to being forced to work for the state.
The concept of moral, justice, libertarianism, and utilitarianism are things that can be observed in life and the society. Although they play important roles in understanding man and society, these are concepts which are difficult to grasp. While Bentham’s philosophy of utilitarianism provides a clear idea of pleasure and pain, Nozick’s libertarianism highlights liberty and what’s just. Both provide strong arguments about However, it should be understood that philosophy does not provide answers to what is right or wrong. Instead, like philosophy, these concepts should serve as guide on how people should live their lives.
Reference
Sandel, M. (1998). Justice: What’s the right thing to do?. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
