Sources & Extracts

Review this excerpt and then go back to the main thread.

The legal philosopher H. L. A. Hart discussed the problem of determining which factors are relevant to questions of justice in his book The Concept of Law. His discussion centers on the relation between justice and law. In some cases, he pointed out, we come up against deep moral differences that take incompatible views on relevance. In other cases, however, context may provide an agreed upon purpose that allows us to agree upon what is relevant.

There is therefore a certain complexity in the structure of the idea of justice. We may say that it consists of two parts: a uniform or constant feature, summarized in the precept 'Treat like cases alike' and a shifting or varying criterion used in determining when, for any given purpose, cases are alike or different. In this respect justice is like the notions of what is genuine, or tall, or warm, which contain an implicit reference to a standard which varies with the classification of the thing to which they are applied. A tall child may be the same height as a short man, a warm winter the same temperature as a cold summer, and a fake diamond may be a genuine antique....

Fundamental differences, in general moral and political outlook, may lead to irreconcilable differences and disagreement as to what characteristics of human beings are to be taken as relevant for the criticism of law as unjust....

It is therefore clear that the criteria of relevant resemblances and differences may often vary with the fundamental moral outlook of a given person or society. Where this is so, assessments of the justice or injustice of the law may be met with counter-assertions inspired by a different morality. But sometimes a consideration of the object which the law in question is admittedly designed to realize may make clear the resemblances and differences which a just law should recognize and they may then be scarcely open to dispute. [H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law, p. 156-159.]