There may be an objective standard for justice, but philosophers disagree about its foundation and content. A strong philosophical answer must evaluate whether principles of justice are independent of personal or cultural opinion, rather than merely assuming that they are universal.
An objective standard is a criterion whose truth does not depend on an individual's preferences or a society's conventions. Moral realism therefore allows claims such as "slavery is unjust" to be true independently of whether a society accepts slavery. By contrast, moral relativism holds that judgments about justice depend on cultural or historical frameworks.
Several theories propose standards that aim to be objective:
| Theory | Proposed standard of justice | Main challenge |
|---|---|---|
| Utilitarianism | Institutions are just when they maximize overall happiness or welfare. | A majority's welfare may be increased by violating an individual's rights. |
| Rawls's justice as fairness | Rational agents behind the veil of ignorance would choose equal basic liberties and permit inequalities only when they benefit the least advantaged. | Critics question whether Rawls's imagined choice situation is genuinely neutral. |
| Nozick's entitlement theory | A distribution is just if holdings arise through just acquisition and voluntary transfer. | Historically unjust acquisition can undermine present entitlements. |
| Relativism | Standards of justice arise from particular social practices or cultures. | It becomes difficult to condemn an entire culture's practices as unjust. |
The strongest argument for objectivity is that rational consistency, impartiality, human interests, or rights can provide standards beyond preference. For example, Rawls removes knowledge of social position so that no chooser can design principles to favour themselves.
However, disagreement between theories does not by itself disprove objectivity. The common misconception is that because people disagree about justice, no objective answer exists. Disagreement may instead show that discovering or justifying the correct standard is difficult.
In an IB Philosophy response, define objectivity and justice, present contrasting arguments, examine their assumptions, and reach a justified conclusion. Avoid listing theories: evaluate whether each theory truly produces impartial principles and whether its consequences are acceptable.
