(Return to main path)

I realize that Perelman referred to the ultimate values on which different systems of justice were based as "arbitrary." I don't know whether I agree with him on that.

There are possibilities that Perelman doesn't discuss at any length.

Maybe it's possible to develop a reasoned based ethics, including a theory of justice. I think that Dee believes that it can be done. A reasoned based theory might be able to derive the necessary first principles of justice from ethical concepts and some non-controversial premises. How can we be so sure that it can't be done? Maybe we're just prejudiced against this possibility because for most of the 20th century the majority of moral philosophers in England and America rejected it.

Another possibility is to develop a theologically based theory of justice. That's what I favor. It's not popular around here to talk about basing ethics on God. But, again, that may be just a prejudice. Philosophy has its fads and fashions just like every other field.