sosial work mirza qaid

8/9/2019 sosial work Mirza Qaid

1/24

1

NAMES of GROUP MEMBERS: 1 NABEEL SAMI. (POL.SCIENCE)

2 TANVIR ZAHID. (POL.SCIENCE)

3 MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN. (POL.SCIENCE)

4 M.NADEEM UL HASAN. (ISLAMIC LEARNINIG)

TEACHERs NAME : SAMINA RAUF

DATE of SUBMISSION :

DEPARTMENT : SOCIAL WORK


2/24

2

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

SOCIAL JUSTICE

THEORIES of SOCIAL JUSTICE

SOCIAL JUSTICE from RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS

SOCIAL JUSTICE in ISLAM

SOCIAL JUSTICE MOVEMENTS

CONCEPT of JUSTICE

JUSTICE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

VARIATIONS of JUSTICE

UNDERSTANDINGS of JUSTICE

SOCIAL INJUSTICE

SOCIAL JUSTICE VS LEGAL JUSTICE

SOCIAL NORMS and SOCIAL LAWS

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES


3/24

3

INTRODUCTION

Social justice is the application of the concept of justice on a social scale.

The term "social justice" was coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in the 1840s.The idea was elaborated by the moral theologian John A. Ryan, who initiated theconcept of a living wage. Father Coughlin used the term in his publications in the

1930s and 40s, and the concept was further expanded upon by John Rawls'writing in the 1990s. It is a part of Catholic social teaching and is one of the FourPillars of the Green Party upheld by the worldwide green parties. Some tenets ofsocial justice have been adopted by those on the left of the political spectrum.

Social justice is also a concept that some use to describe the movement towardsa socially just world. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts ofhuman rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economicegalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even

property redistribution, policies aimed toward achieving that whichdevelopmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity and equalityof outcome than may currently exist in some societies or are available to someclasses in a given society.

We will discuss it further that what are the factors which involve in this serious

social act. Social justice is not the same justice that we understand about justice.

It consists of basic human rights and a man should know about their basic rights

and also protect them.


4/24

4

THEORIES of SOCIAL JUSTICE

John Rawls

The political philosopher John Rawls draws on the utilitarian insights of Bentham andMill, the social contract ideas of Locke, and the categorical imperative ideas of Kant. Hisfirst statement of principle was made in A Theory of Justice (1971) where he proposedthat, "Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare ofsociety as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of

freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others." (at p3). Adeontological proposition that echoes Kant in framing the moral good of justice inabsolutist terms. His views are definitively restated in Political Liberalism (1993), wheresociety is seen, "as a fair system of co-operation over time, from one generation to thenext." (at p14).

All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political institutions, bothformal and informal. In testing how well these elements fit and work together, Rawlsbased a key test of legitimacy on the theories of social contract. To determine whetherany particular system of collectively enforced social arrangements is legitimate, heargued that one must look for agreement by the people who are subject to it, but notnecessarily to an objective notion of justice based on coherent ideological grounding.

Obviously, not every citizen can be asked to participate in a poll to determine his or herconsent to every proposal in which some degree of coercion is involved, so one has toassume that all citizens are reasonable. Rawls constructed an argument for a two-stageprocess to determine a citizen's hypothetical agreement:

* the citizen agrees to be represented by X for certain purposes; to that extent, X holdsthese powers as a trustee for the citizen;

* X agrees that a use of enforcement in a particular social context is legitimate; thecitizen, therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the function of the trustee torepresent the citizen in this way.

This applies to one person representing a small group (e.g. to the organiser of a social

event setting a dress code) as equally as it does to national governments which are theultimate trustees, holding representative powers for the benefit of all citizens within theirterritorial boundaries, and if those governments fail to provide for the welfare of theircitizens according to the principles of justice, they are not legitimate. To emphasise thegeneral principle that justice should rise from the people and not be dictated by the law-making powers of governments, Rawls asserted that, "There is . . . a general presumptionagainst imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct without sufficient reason. Butthis presumption creates no special priority for any particular liberty." (at pp291292)This is support for an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all states


5/24

5

should respect and uphold to some extent, the list proposed by Rawls matches thenormative human rights that have international recognition and direct enforcement insome nation states where the citizens need encouragement to act in way that fixes agreater degree of equality of outcome.

The basic liberties according to Rawls

* Freedom of thought;* Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion,

philosophy, and morality;* Political liberties (e.g. representative democratic institutions, freedom of speech and

the press, and freedom of assembly);* Freedom of association;* Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (viz: freedom from

slavery, freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to choose one'soccupation); and

* Rights and liberties covered by the rule of law.

Criticism

Many authors criticize the idea that there exists an objective standard of social justice.Moral relativists deny that there is any kind of objective standard for justice in general.Non-cognitivists, moral skeptics, moral nihilists, and most logical positivists deny theepistemic possibility of objective notions of justice. Cynics (such as Niccol Machiavelli)believe that any ideal of social justice is ultimately a mere justification for the status quo.

Supporters of social darwinism believe that social justice assists the least fit toreproduce, sometimes labeled as dysgenics, and hence should be opposed.

Many other people accept some of the basic principles of social justice, such as the ideathat all human beings have a basic level of value, but disagree with the elaborateconclusions that may or may not follow from this. One example is the statement by H. G.Wells that all people are "equally entitled to the respect of their fellow-men."[cite thisquote]

On the other hand, some scholars reject the very idea of social justice as meaningless,religious, self-contradictory, and ideological, believing that to realize any degree of social

justice is unfeasible, and that the attempt to do so must destroy all liberty. The most

complete rejection of the concept of social justice comes from Friedrich Hayek of theAustrian School of economics:

There can be no test by which we can discover what is 'socially unjust' because thereis no subject by which such an injustice can be committed, and there are no rules ofindividual conduct the observance of which in the market order would secure to theindividuals and groups the position which as such (as distinguished from the procedureby which it is determined) would appear just to us. [Social justice] does not belong to thecategory of error but to that of nonsense, like the term `a moral stone'.


6/24

6

SOCIAL JUSTICE from RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS

Jewish social teaching

Tikkun olam

In To Heal a Fractured World: The Ethics of Responsibility, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks claimsthat social justice has a central place in Judaism. One of Judaisms most distinctive and

challenging ideas is its ethics of responsibility reflected in the concepts of simcha("gladness" or "joy"), tzedakah ("the religious obligation to perform charity andphilanthropic acts"), chesed ("deeds of kindness"), and tikkun olam ("repairing theworld").

Catholic social teaching

Catholic social teaching comprises those aspects of Roman Catholic doctrine whichrelate to matters dealing with the collective aspect of humanity. A distinctive feature ofCatholic social teaching is its concern for the poorest members of society. Two of theseven key areas[2] of Catholic social teaching are pertinent to social justice:

* Life and dignity of the human person: The foundational principle of all Catholic SocialTeaching is the sanctity of all human life and the inherent dignity of every human person.Human life must be valued above all material possessions.

* Preferential option for the poor and vulnerable: Jesus taught that on the Day ofJudgement God will ask what each person did to help the poor and needy: "Amen, I sayto you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me."[3] TheCatholic Church teaches that through words, prayers and deeds one must showsolidarity with, and compassion for, the poor. The moral test of any society is "how ittreats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on theconscience of the nation. People are called to look at public policy decisions in terms ofhow they affect the poor."[4]

Even before it was propounded in the Catholic social teachings, Social Justice appearedregularly in the history of the Catholic Church:

* The term "social justice" was coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in the 1840s, based


7/24

7

on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas. He wrote extensively in his journal Civilt Cattolica,engaging both capitalist and socialist theories from a natural law viewpoint. His basicpremise was that the rival economic theories, based on subjective Cartesian thinking,undermined the unity of society present in Thomistic metaphysics; neither the liberalcapitalists nor the communists concerned themselves with public moral philosophy.

* Pope Leo XIII, who studied under Taparelli, published in 1891 the encyclical, Rerum

Novarum (On the Condition of the Working Classes), rejecting both socialism andcapitalism, while defending labor unions and private property. He stated that societyshould be based on cooperation and not class conflict and competition. In thisdocument, Leo set out the Catholic Church's response to the social instability and laborconflict that had arisen in the wake of industrialization and had led to the rise ofsocialism. The Pope taught that the role of the State is to promote social justice throughthe protection of rights, while the Church must speak out on social issues in order toteach correct social principles and ensure class harmony.

* The encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (On Reconstruction of the Social Order, literally"in the fortieth year") of 1931 by Pope Pius XI, encourages a living wage, subsidiarity,and teaches that social justice is a personal virtue as well as an attribute of the socialorder: society can be just only if individuals and institutions are just.

* Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Deus Caritas Est ("God is Love") of 2006 teaches thatjustice is the defining concern of the state and the central concern of politics, and not ofthe church, which has charity as its central social concern. The laity has the specificresponsibility of pursuing social justice in civil society. The church's active role in social

justice should be to inform the debate, using reason and natural law, and also byproviding moral and spiritual formation for those involved in politics.

* The official Catholic doctrine on social justice can be found in the book Compendiumof the Social Doctrine of the Church, published in 2004 and updated in 2006, by thePontifical Council Iustitia et Pax.


8/24

8

SOCIAL JUSTICE in ISLAM

A gathering of intellectuals was convened at the Law College of Ranchi on

December 14, 1991, under the persidentship of Mr. Justice Satishwar Rao. On thatoccasion I addressed the meeting on the topic of 'Social Justice in Islam.' Thetext of my address, including some later additions, is as follows.

Social Justice means equality in law, or justice for all. Prior to the advent of Islam.This kind of social justice was almost unknown either in theory or in practice. Itwas left to Islam then to establish equal justice for the first time in human history.This reversal of the old order is so established a fact that every non-Muslimthinkers have acknowledged it. For instance, Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902)writes in one of this letters.

'If ever any religion approached to this equality in any appreciable manner, it isIslam and Islam alone.' (p. 379).

The contribution of Islam in this respect can be placed under three headings:first, the formulation of a complete ideology of human equality and justice;second the giving of powerful incentive to adopt this ideology; and third, theestablishment of a living example of equality and justice in all walks life.

n ancient times the concept of human inequality, which was prevalenteverywhere, gave rise to social injustice in every society.

For example, the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, regarded certain classes ofindividuals as natural slaves. Although there were other thinkers who did notsubscribe to this view, slavery continued to be widespread in Rome and Greece,and indeed, throughout the entire world of antiquity.

In modern times, this concept has been further strengthened by Darwin's theoryof evolution, according to which mankind was regarded as having achieveddiffering levels of development, the apex being white European civilization.

The superstitious concept of racial differences, handed down to us from ancienttimes, paved the way for social discrimination. And such discrimination found anacademic basis in modern times in Darwin's theory of evolution, which purportedto show that in the evolutionary process, some groups had made distinctiveprogress while many other groups had been left far behind. That is to say thatcertain groups attained a superior level, while others remained in a primitivecondition.


9/24

9

Thanks to this theory of evolution, the European nations came to regard othernations as being inferior to them--hence the concept of 'the white man's burden'according to which the white races considered themselves invested with thenatural right to subjugate the rest of the world in order to civilize it. This was thelogic behind the colonialism of modem times. These concepts, in some measure,

are still extant.

The world of today can be broadly divided into two parts--the traditional and thescientific. The former appears undeveloped and the latter developed. But from thestandpoint of social justice, there is no difference, because in both, beliefs whichform a permanent obstacle to social justice still persist.

The traditional world is influenced to a large extent by believers in Karma, thetheory that anyone born today necessarily shoulders the burden of his pastdeeds. As they see it, that is a law of nature, as such, has to be submitted tounquestioningly. A belief of this nature obviously stifles any possible incentive

for social justice. In the light of such a belief 'injustice' simply becomes 'nature'sverdict.' The human being has to suffer in this world for his misdeeds in hisprevious life cycle. Given this state of affairs, it is just not possible for anyone toalleviate human suffering. That being so, how can there be any motivation to actout of a sense of justice?

The scientific world is likewise under the influence of this concept of humaninequality, but for another reason--the general acceptance gained by the theory ofevolution. The concept of the biological evolution of life seeks to explain thedifferences in the existing species, advancing the theory that in the process ofevolution some have gone forward while others have been left behind. For

instance, Darwin claims that the female of the human species remained at aprimitive stage in the evolutionary process while 'man has ultimately becomesuperior to woman'. By the same token, the blacks of Africa, the pygmies andother dwarfish races have been 'left behind.' Because of this theory, the scientificworld cannot be sympathetic to the supposedly backward, or under evolvedraces.

The theory has been advanced that if people suffer a variety of afflictions, it is'their own fault.' That is to say that those who are made to feel inferior in thetreatment they receive from others are, in fact, suffering the consequences oftheir own shortcomings. It is as if they were fated to be the victims of injustice;the perpetrators are not, therefore, to be blamed.

With the advent of Islam, all such ideas based on an inherent inequality lostground. In different ways, and with great persistence Islam presented to the worldthe concept that, in spite of outward differences, all human beings are equal. Allare entitled to equal social status and equal rights. No one is inferior or superior.Here are two references from the Qur'an and Hadith respectively.


10/24

10

Men, we have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nationsand tribes that you might get to know one another. The noblest of you in Allah'ssight is the most righteous of you. Allah is wise and all knowing (49:13).

According to this verse of the Qur'an, the differences of color and race found

among human beings is for the purpose, not of discrimination, but ofidentification. Men in essence are equal. What really distinguishes one man fromanother is character. His superiority can therefore bespoken of only in terms ofthe degree to which a man is honorable. The truly honorable man is one who isGod--fearing and who recognizes and fulfils the rights of God and his fellow men.

On the occasion of the final pilgrimage, the Prophet delivered his last sermonwhile sitting oh his camel. One of the things he said is recorded in these words:

'O people, listen carefully, your Lord is one Lord, there is no doubt about it. Yourancestor, is one ancestor, there is no doubt about it. Listen well to my words: no

Arab has any superiority over a non--Arab, and no nonArab is superior to anArab. No black is superior to a brown or red, and no red superior to any black. Ifthere is any superiority in anyone it is due to his God--fearing qualities. Have Iconveyed the message?'the Prophet asked the people. The people answeredfrom all corners, 'Indeed so! God be witness.' Then the Prophet said: 'Let him thatis present tell it unto him that is absent.'(Al-Jamili Ahkam al-Qur'an, 16:342)

This declaration was made by the Prophet in the final year of his life at a timewhen the whole of Arabia had been conquered. As such, it wasnot the declarationof a reformer, but of a ruler of the time. His definition of human equality was not

just listened to as a theory, but was immediately put into practice--nay, enforced

in society.

In his declaration, the Prophet told the people that just as there is one Creator ofthis world so all the human beings in this world were born of one man andwoman. All human beings were thus equal, being each other's brothers andsisters. They might differ in respect of appearance, but as to honor, status andthe right to legal justice, there was no difference between them.

So far as human status is concerned, Islam clearly states that if people have beenplaced on different rungs of the social ladder, this is not a matter of having beenfavored with or deprived of social distinction but of their being under divine trial.God has created man in this world in order to test him. Worldly goods andposition (or the lack of them) are used by God as instruments of this test. Theyare like examination papers set by the Almighty. Opulence and penury are bothintended to be states in which man is tested. He should, therefore, stop sufferingfrom inferiority or superiority complexes, and should consider instead whether heis going to pass or fail this test.


11/24

11

IMPACT on HISTORY

Shortly before his death on the eve of his last pilgrimage, the Prophet of Islamgave a sermon which came to be known as the sermon of the Final pilgrimage.One of the historic declarations made in this sermon was: 'Everything pertaining

to paganism now lies beneath my feet." 'With these words, the Prophetannounced the advent of a new age, an age freed by him of all superstition andushered in with the special succor of God.

This historic change was first wrought within Arabia, then it spread beyond itsfrontiers, ultimately making itself felt throughout the entire world. This resulted inthe eradication of the division in society between free men and slaves and theinception of the rule of law all over the world. It also caused all such philosophiesas sanctioned injustice and social inequality to lose in influence. Now, anyphilosophy based on human inequality finds no ground on which to flourish.

One example of this in modem times is provided by Hitler, according to whom theGerman race was superior to all others. Firm in this belief, he put forward the ideathat it was their birthright to assert their supremacy over all other nations. 'Heregarded inequality between races and individuals as part of an unchangeablenatural order and exalted the Aryan race as the sole creative element of mankind.'(8/967).

But what a fate awaited Hitler! His popularity in Europe rapidly waned and he wasfinally deserted even by his own minions in his own country. In utter frustration,he committed suicide in a bunker in Berlin, thus annihilating not only himself butthe Nazi movement which he had set in motion.

The influence of the social revolution brought about by the Prophet is still alive,not only in Muslim countries, but indirectly throughout the entire inhabited world.On the question of social justice, or equal justice researchers have acknowledgedthat if ever any system has truly attained this end, it is Islam. One suchacknowledgement by Swami Vivekanand, has been mentioned above. Now thequestion arises as to how Islam, managed to succeed in this when other religionsor systems failed. There are two important reasons for this. One is that Islamgives us a complete ideology in favor of human equality. The other is that itprovides humanity with a historical example of that ideologyput into practice.

These are the points on which other religions have failed. To make this pointclear, I shall cite here two examples from Hinduism and Christianity.

Hinduism as has been explained above, divides humanity as a matter basic beliefinto two parts. Its very philosophy demands a high position for one group and alow position for another. The existence of this belief makes it impossible to meteout equal treatment to both groups. Those who live by this system can neverregard themselves as being equal to those who appear inferior to them by birth.


12/24

12

Here it is pertinent to mention the Backward Classes Commission set up by thePresident of India in 1953, with Kaka Sahab Kalelkar as its chairman. After makinga survey which was completed in 1955, it presented a 262 page report which waspublished in 1956 by the Government press.

This report (available in the Delhi Public Library, Delhi) stated that the castesystem of India was of a very different nature from the class system prevalentelsewhere. In India, this system is not traceable purely to economic causes as isgenerally the case in other countries. Its roots, on the contrary, go much deeper,being enshrined in the system of beliefs. According to the report, 'it is thepeculiarity of India that it recognized the social differences inherent in humannature and gave them an institutional and mystical form with a religious andspiritual background.'

What the Kalelkar Commission states is borne out by the facts. It is indisputablethat social differences in India have been traced to qualities inherent in human

nature. Given this belief, they are an inevitable and natural reality. In a societywhere, of necessity, such a concept exists, the ideas of obliterating thesedifferences and of having equal justice cannot have any general appeal.

A similar obstacle to equality is condoned even by Christianity.

Here I should like to refer to a report prepared by a team of five Christianjournalists and published in the Sunday Review (Times of India) of December 22,1991. According to this report, the number of converts to Christianity from lowcastes is more than fifty percent, these being known as Dalit Christians. 'Thosewho came over from the backward Hindu strata, still find themselves bogged

down in discrimination by the Church.'

Dalit Christians are prevented from burying their dead in grave yards along withupper caste Christians. They cannot marry into upper caste Christian families. Inmany churches they have separate seating arrangements. They are discriminatedagainst in educational institutions run by Christians themselves. The casteprejudice extends even to the Christian clergy. This is specially true to theCatholic Church whose priests are almost totally drawn from the upper or middleclasses. In Kerala, where Christianity has thrived for 2,000 years, caste is evidenton a social level. The caste factor surfaces time and again, causing intenseanguish to members of the Dalit Christian communities.

When Dr. Casimir Gnanadickan, Catholic Archbishop of Madras was asked aboutthis, he admitted that a strong caste system existed with the Church set-up. 'Iagree, it was a retrograde step. But sometimes the power of faith cannot breakreality.'

It is true that Christianity does not teach human inequality or social injustice. Butwhat is lacking in Christianity is a powerful,historical example of human equality.


13/24

13

The mission of Christ did not reach beyond the invitation to faith. It did not reachthe stage of practical revolution. That is why, in the first phase of Christianity nosuch example of human equality could be set. In the absence of tellingprecedents, belief alone is not sufficient to bring about any practical change.

The Islamic system is totally different from those of Hinduism and Christianity. Init, there exists a complete ideology in favor of human equality, while alongside itthere exists a perfect, practical example. On both counts, the first phase of Islamset the course of Islamic history for all eternity. And Islamic history will continueforever in the same direction, for there is no influence powerful enough in theworld to alter its course.


14/24

14

SOCIAL JUSTICE MOVEMENTS

Social justice is also a concept that is used to describe the movement towards a sociallyjust world, ie. the Global Justice Movement. In this context, social justice is based on the

concepts of human rights and equality, and can be defined as "the way in which humanrights are manifested in the everyday lives of people at every level of society".[5].

There are a number of movements that are working to achieve social justice insociety.[6][7] These movements are working towards the realization of a world where allmembers of a society, regardless of background or procedural justice, have basic humanrights and equal access to the benefits of their society.

The Green Party

Social Justice (sometimes "Social Equality and Global Equality and Economic Justice")is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Party and is sometimes referred to as "Social andGlobal Equality" or "Economic Justice". The Canadian party defines the principle as the"equitable distribution of resources to ensure that all have full opportunities for personaland social development".[8] As one of the 10 key values of the party in the United States,social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people "to benefit equallyfrom the resources afforded us by society and the environment."[9]

Social Justice in Healthcare

Social justice has more recently made its way into the field of bioethics. Discussioninvolves topics such as affordable access to health care, especially for low incomehouseholds and family. The discussion also raises questions such as whether societyshould burden healthcare costs for low income families, and whether the globalmarketplace is a good thing to deal with healthcare. Ruth Faden and Madison Powers ofthe Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics focus their analysis of social justice onwhich inequalities matter the most. They develop a social justice theory that answerssome of these questions in concrete settings


15/24

15

CONCEPT of JUSTICE

Justice concerns itself with the proper ordering of things and people within asociety. As a concept it has been subject to philosophical, legal, and theologicalreflection and debate throughout our history. A number of important questionssurrounding justice have been fiercely debated over the course of westernhistory: What is justice? What does it demand of individuals and societies? Whatis the proper distribution of wealth and resources in society: equal, meritocratic,according to status, or some other arrangement? There are myriad possibleanswers to these questions from divergent perspectives on the political andphilosophical spectrum.

According to most theories of justice, it is overwhelmingly important: JohnRawls, for instance, claims that "Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, astruth is of systems of thought." Justice can be thought of as distinct from andmore fundamental than benevolence, charity, mercy, generosity or compassion.Justice has traditionally been associated with concepts of fate, reincarnation orDivine Providence, i.e. with a life in accordance with the cosmic plan. Theassociation of justice with fairness has thus been historically and culturally rareand is perhaps chiefly a modern innovation.

Studies at UCLA in 2008 have indicated that reactions to fairness are "wired" into

the brain and that, "Fairness is activating the same part of the brain that respondsto food in rats... This is consistent with the notion that being treated fairlysatisfies a basic need" . Research conducted in 2003 at Emory University,Georgia, involving Capuchin Monkeys demonstrated that other cooperativeanimals also possess such a sense and that "inequity aversion may not beuniquely human." indicating that ideas of fairness and justice may be instinctualin nature.


16/24

16

JUSTICE and SOCIAL JUSTICE

Justice functions at Law, based upon a Good Set of Rules, while Social Justicefunctions in Equity based upon Need.

In an ideal Legal System, Law and Equity merge into the same Legal System.As Bernard Lonergan puts it, the world is just to complex to be adequately dealtwith by a linear set of rules. Laws enacted by the legislature are basically alinear set of rules.

Equity, on the other hand, makes an Equitable Exception from Law based upon

Need. Equity intervenes when there is no adequate remedy at Law. There is noadequate remedy at law when there is an injustice at Law. A person knows thatthere is an injustice at Law based upon Intuition and Wisdom, and sometimeseven reason. As Aristotle puts it, the lawgiver can only provide rules to dealwith the general case, and the concrete world is more complex than the generalcase which the lawgiver attempts to deal with using a General or Classical Rule.In fact, when you look at the World, as Object, it is apparent that there are no realClassical natural laws, but only probable averages based upon statistical normswhich are then generalized as Classical Laws, even though they are not.With experience, it becomes apparent that Equity often intervenes is a class ofsimilar cases.

When this happens, the Legal Rule must be given an Equitable Interpretationand reformed or changed to accommodate the Equitable Factor. Thus, we nowhave Fiduciary Duty Rules and the Unconscionability Doctrine in Law which arebasically Legal Rules, and no longer Equitable Maxims. In a Just Legal System,Justice incorporates Equity, and the need for the idea of Social Justice begins toevaporate.


17/24

17

VARIATIONS of JUSTICE

Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, where punishment is forward-looking. Justified by the ability to achieve future social benefits resulting in crimereduction, the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome.

Retributive justice regulates proportionate response to crime proven by lawfulevidence, so that punishment is justly imposed and considered as morally-correct and fully deserved. The law of retaliation (lex talionis) is a military theoryof retributive justice, which says that reciprocity should be equal to the wrongsuffered; "life for life, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

Restorative justice is concerned not so much with retribution and punishment aswith (a) making the victim whole and (b) reintegrating the offender into society.This approach frequently brings an offender and a victim together, so that theoffender can better understand the effect his/her offense had on the victim.

Distributive justice is directed at the proper allocation of things wealth, power,reward, respect between different people.

Oppressive Law exercises an authoritarian approach to legislation which is"totally unrelated to justice", a tyrannical interpretation of law is one in which thepopulation lives under restriction from unlawful legislation.

Some theorists, such as the classical Greeks and Romans, conceive of justice asa virtuea property of people, and only derivatively of their actions and theinstitutions they create. Others emphasize actions or institutions, and onlyderivatively the people who bring them about. The source of justice has variouslybeen attributed to harmony, divine command, natural law, or human creation.


18/24

18

UNDERSTANDINGS of JUSTICE

Justice as harmony

In his dialogue Republic, Plato uses Socrates to argue for justice which coversboth the just person and the just City State. Justice is a proper, harmoniousrelationship between the warring parts of the person or city. Hence Plato'sdefinition of justice is that justice is the having and doing of what is one's own. A

just man is a man in just the right place, doing his best and giving the preciseequivalent of what he has received. This applies both at the individual level and atthe universal level. A persons soul has three parts reason, spirit and desire.Similarly, a city has three parts Socrates uses the parable of the chariot toillustrate his point: a chariot works as a whole because the two horses power is

directed by the charioteer. Lovers of wisdom philosophers, in one sense of theterm should rule because only they understand what is good. If one is ill, onegoes to a doctor rather than a quack, because the doctor is expert in the subjectof health. Similarly, one should trust ones city to an expert in the subject of thegood, not to a mere politician who tries to gain power by giving people what theywant, rather than whats good for them. Socrates uses the parable of the ship toillustrate this point: the unjust city is like a ship in open ocean, crewed by apowerful but drunken captain (the common people), a group of untrustworthyadvisors who try to manipulate the captain into giving them power over the shipscourse (the politicians), and a navigator (the philosopher) who is the only onewho knows how to get the ship to port. For Socrates, the only way the ship willreach its destination the good is if the navigator takes charge.

Justice as divine command

command. Killing is wrong and therefore must be punished and if not punishedwhat should be done? There is a famous paradox called the Euthyphro dilemmawhich essentially asks: is something right because God commands it, or doesGod command it because it's right? If the former, then justice is arbitrary; if thelatter, then morality exists on a higher order than God, who becomes little morethan a passer-on of moral knowledge. Some Divine command advocates respond

by pointing out that the dilemma is false: goodness is the very nature of God andis necessarily expressed in His commands.[edit] Justice as natural lawMain article: Natural law

For advocates of the theory that justice is part of natural law (e.g., John Locke), itinvolves the system of consequences which Justice as a divine law iscommanding, and indeed the whole of morality, is the authoritative naturally


19/24

19

derives from any action or choice. In this, it is similar to the laws of physics: inthe same way as the Third of Newton's laws of Motion requires that for everyaction there must be an equal and opposite reaction, justice requires accordingindividuals or groups what they actually deserve, merit, or are entitled to. Justice,on this account, is a universal and absolute concept: laws, principles, religions,

etc., are merely attempts to codify that concept, sometimes with results thatentirely contradict the true nature of justice.Justice as human creation

In contrast to the understandings canvassed so far, justice may be understood asa human creation, rather than a discovery of harmony, divine command, ornatural law. This claim can be understood in a number of ways, with thefundamental division being between those who argue that justice is the creationof some humans, and those who argue that it is the creation of all humans.

Justice as authoritative command

According to thinkers including Thomas Hobbes, justice is created by public,enforceable, authoritative rules, and injustice is whatever those rules forbid,regardless of their relation to morality. Justice is created, not merely described orapproximated, by the command of an absolute sovereign power. This positionhas some similarities with divine command theory (see above), with thedifference that the state (or other authority) replaces God.[edit] Justice as trickery

In Republic, the character Thrasymachus argues that justice is the interest of thestrongmerely a name for what the powerful or cunning ruler has imposed onthe people.

Justice as mutual agreement

According to thinkers in the social contract tradition, justice is derived from themutual agreement of everyone concerned; or, in many versions, from what theywould agree to under hypothetical conditions including equality and absence ofbias. This account is considered further below, under Justice as fairness.


20/24

20

SOCIAL INJUSTICE

Social Injustice is a concept relating to the claimed unfairness or injustice of a

society in its divisions of rewards and burdens and other incidental inequalities.The concept is distinct from those of justice in law, which may or may not beconsidered moral in practice, or from the concept of justice within a coherentideological system, which focuses on just process rather than on incidentalinequalities. Opposition to social injustice is increasingly a platform of emergingpolitical parties. Social injustice arises when equals are treated unequally andunequals are treated equally[vague]. (Aristotle's principle of injustice)

Historically, authors have used literature to denounce or to satirize perceivedsocial injustices in their societies. Some examples are Niyi Osundare,

Tatamkhulu Afrika, Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, Dario Fo, Minfong Ho, VictorHugo, Harper Lee, James A. Michener, Harold Pinter, Upton Sinclair, HarrietBeecher Stowe, Oscar Wilde, Alan Paton, and George Orwell.

Social injustice is caused by certain barriers that prevent full social justice. Someof the major barriers include: prejudice, discrimination, oppression, racism,classism, ableism, ageism,stereotyping and sexism.

Over the last 3040 years, most social injustice in the US and the world has beenbased on economic class and the lack of access to non-violent mechanisms for

reform by the middle class and working class[citation needed]. In order to fullyovercome incidental inequalities which some[who?] view as socially unjust thesebarriers must be removed from our society and differences to rig equality ofoutcome must be embraced.

People of 3rd world countries are often face many difficulties as such social

injustice as well . Leaders of their countries do not provide sufficient atmosphere

to them and they forcibly subordinate to them.


21/24

21

SOCIAL JUSTICE Vs LEGAL JUSTICE

Social justice is imprimis an informal social process rather than a formal legalprocedure. It is the moral standard of a society to which its laws and actionsconform. The injustices and legal disabilities against certain sections of thesociety enshrined in many rules of Indian society in bygone days are now amatter of the past.

It is only now that the need of liberty, equality, security, freedom from want, fearand frustration as parameters of social justice are realised. Social justice exconsequently demands preferential treatment for the socially backward andrepressed classes who are at a disadvantage in respect to others.

Such as in Pakistan the different classes have been emerged now from thesedays. The main classes are two upper class and the lower class. People have notnecessities of life and they do not know how to get it legally. At the other sidepeople who have large number of money in their bank accounts.


22/24

22

SOCIAL NORMS and SOCIAL LAWSWhenever the enactment of law is consentaneous to a change in social norms,

the law as a device of legal sanction against deviations there-from, succeeds inlegalizing these neonate social norms. However, the law proves ill-equipped andfalls into desuetude while it seeks to introduce intempestive social norms as ameans of social justice for forced compliance as Festinger called it in AnAnalysis of Compliant Behaviour. The paradigm is the law regarding dowry andchild marriage being not as effective as that pertaining to monogamy for lack ofsocial force behind it.

Law is an instrument of both the continuity of social behaviour and of socialchange. Manu had said, Immemorial custom is transcendent law Social

consuetudes metamorphose into social laws in rerum natura and perpetuatesocial customs. Professor B.Kuppuswamy in his book Social Change in Indiawrites about two functions of the law according to this view is social control andthe major problem of law is to design the legal sanctions to minimise deviancesand to maintain social stability. According to the other view, law could be moredynamic. It has not only the function of social control but it has also to bringabout social change by influencing behavior, beliefs and values. The social lawsof India are devised to bear the kiaugh of the dynamic function of bringing aboutsocial change by influencing behavious, beliefs and value in addition to socialcontrol. In Indian society where social inequalities more suo, form the bedrock ofliving for historical reasons and embedded in the Indian psyche as consuetudes

and basic social rules more majorum, the awakening and metabasis to newvalues of social equality and social justice from the deep slumber of a millenniumare not easy to come by. Though isolated calls for certain changes are heardmostly from the self-made spokesmen of the oppressed classes because of theinfluences of liberal western thoughts, the albatross of orchestrating thesethoughts to the mosaic of the laws of the land falls on the government. Sociallaws function as catalysts of social change in the Indian situation.


23/24

23

CONCLUSION

We decided to take a very difficult topic that mostly students refuse to work on it.But our ambition is to work on a new thing that we had never experienced before.We researched and worked with serious devotion.

Social justice is something that a normally person do not know it well about,butwe have tried to figured out some points that you can understand from thesepoints. Social justice is also a concept that some use to describe the movementtowards a socially just world.

Culture is an essential tool for it. Without it one should never know about his

societys living pattern and many socially things.

Social justice is

1: Human rights

2: Know your social rights as well as duties

3: Know your social norms

4: Protect the society with harmful changes

5: Equality

6: Fair distribution of wealth in the society

7: Every person is an important part of the society

REFERENCES


24/24

24

1:Law, legislation, and liberty, Volume 2, The Mirage of Social Justice", F.A.Hayek.

2:Seven Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching

3: Just Comment - Volume 3 Number 1, 2000

4: Social Justice and Social Justice Movements

5: http://www.greenparty.ca/en/about-us

6: http://www.gp.org/tenkey.shtml

7:http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1144&dat

8:http://www.Wikipedia.org

9:www.alrisala.org/Articles/papers

10:www.al-islam.org

sosial work mirza qaid

Documents