This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?…

Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? (original 2009; edition 2010)

by Michael J. Sandel

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingMentions
1,1412410,425 (4.19)21
Title:Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?
Authors:Michael J. Sandel
Info:Farrar, Straus and Giroux (2010), Edition: Reprint, Paperback, 320 pages
Collections:Tom's Books

Work details

Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? by Michael J. Sandel (2009)


Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

No current Talk conversations about this book.

» See also 21 mentions

English (23)  Dutch (1)  All languages (24)
Showing 1-5 of 23 (next | show all)
Well-reasoned, compelling, and argued persuasively, this is a book I felt obliged to read slowly and deliberately from a perceived obligation to be able to internalize its lessons. If I were charged with teaching civics to students, I can't imagine not including it in my required reading. As a parent, I plan to reread it and make use of its examples and arguments when discussing politics with my kids. ( )
  cdogzilla | Jan 16, 2017 |
No suelo leer "no-ficción", pero el profesor Sandel es un genio. ( )
  Glire | Jun 22, 2016 |
No suelo leer "no-ficción", pero el profesor Sandel es un genio. ( )
  Glire | Jul 7, 2014 |
I wasn't sure I'd get much out of this book, since I've already listened to the series of Dr. Sandel's lectures on which it's based. But I loved that series, and figured the book would be worth a shot. I'm so glad I did. Not only was the refresher worthwhile, but the final chapter (which is almost entirely new from the course) is a really great finish.

Sandel uses more or less the same disquisitive approach to the question of justice here that he used in the aforementioned course, and it's a good technique. It allows him to address a pretty thorny topic from a position of relative neutrality, and to proceed through some of the most significant historical thinking about it in an accessible way.

I also appreciated the boldness of his final section, because a more typical means of wrapping up would have been to feign complete neutrality, and resist taking any kind of stand. I suppose it doesn't hurt, either, that I agree generally with the stand he does take. ( )
1 vote spoko | Nov 14, 2013 |
I love books like this: they challenge the mind and lead to great discussions.

Michael Sandel teaches a very popular course at Harvard entitled “Justice.” It’s available in video through the iTunes University (a phenomenal resource, I might add.) Sandel uses a series of hypothetical situations to focus the class on the different ways philosophers would have analyzed and puzzled out solutions to the problems raised in the hypotheticals. (This somewhat Socratic method is also used very effectively in several magnificent series created by Fred Friendly: The Constitution: That Delicate Balance and Ethics in America I & II - both available for free and I cannot recommend them too highly.)*

Sandel, reprises some of the major themes of that course in this fascinating book. I listened to this book as an audiobook and it’s read by Sandel who does an excellent narration. He again begins by posing several moral dilemmas and uses those as jumping off points for a discussion of the three philosophical theories and asking how they might help us decide what constitutes justice: that which provides the maximum good to the largest possible number of people; individual freedoms as opposed to collective virtues; or that which promotes the development of harmonious communities.

One example of a moral dilemma is taken from a true story. A platoon sergeant in Afghanistan was behind Taliban lines with three other soldiers on patrol when they came across two goat herders with their flock. Knowing that if they released the goat herders their position might be revealed they had to make a decision: whether to kill the goat herders and possibly save themselves, or whether to let them go and assume they were innocent civilians. They had no way to simply disable the man and boy and leave them. The sergeant polled his men and the vote was to kill them, but, examining his “Christian conscience” the sergeant decided to let them live. They were later ambushed by the Taliban and all of his men were killed and he barely escaped having been severely injured. In fact the rescue chopper sent to rescue them was shot down killing those on board. The sergeant later said he had made the wrong decision and should have killed the goat herders. Thank goodness I have never been faced with such a dilemma.

A really intriguing case was that of how we view our bodies. The Libertarian argues we own our bodies and therefore can do whatever we want with them. Can we then sell our body parts? Let’s envision the poor Indian who desperately wants to send his children to college. He sells one kidney. Problems yet? Now along comes a second child and the man is willing to sell his second kidney for his child even knowing that he cannot survive. How many of us would approve of his decision? Is he despicable? or a hero? So if he is despciable, how about the man who throws himself in front of the train to push his child out of the way who wandered on to the tracks. I suspect most people would consider him a hero, yet he is deliberately sacrificing his life for that of the child? How is that different from the Indian? A real case involved a prisoner in the Califonia prison system (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Prison-Dad-s-Kidney-Plea-Refused-by-UC-Eth...) who wanted to donate his remaining kidney to his daughter (the first donation had failed to take.) How is his willingness to self-sacrifice his life for his child different from the fellow with the fellow who saves his daughter from the train? The UC Ethics board denied his request. So does their decision mean that the state owns his body and can determine what to do with it? And what if a pregnant woman decided to sell (does it make a difference if it’s a donation as opposed to a sale?) her fetus? What are the rights of the state?

Sandel uses the last couple of chapters to state his own preference of what constitutes Justice. I found these the least interesting of the book. The best part if his weaving of the hypotheticals with a deep understanding of the historical and philosophical viewpoints.

Listening to this book, I was reminded of a talk I heard given by Rushworth Kidder whose point was that deciding between good and evil is easy; the hard decisions are those that require choosing between two goods each of which may have a different outcome.

My wife and I listened to this book on a trip and the dilemmas posed some very lively discussions.

* http://www.learner.org/resources/series72.html and http://www.learner.org/resources/series81.html ( )
2 vote ecw0647 | Sep 30, 2013 |
Showing 1-5 of 23 (next | show all)
no reviews | add a review
You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Series (with order)
Canonical title
Original title
Information from the Italian Common Knowledge. Edit to localize it to your language.
Alternative titles
Original publication date
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Awards and honors
For Kiku, with love
First words
In the summer of 2004, Hurricane Charley roared out of the Gulf of Mexico and swept across Florida to the Atlantic Ocean.
Last words
(Click to show. Warning: May contain spoilers.)
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Publisher series
Original language
Canonical DDC/MDS

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English (2)

Book description
Haiku summary

Amazon.com Product Description (ISBN 0374532508, Paperback)

“For Michael Sandel, justice is not a spectator sport,” The Nation’s reviewer of Justice remarked. In his acclaimed book—based on his legendary Harvard course—Sandel offers a rare education in thinking through the complicated issues and controversies we face in public life today. It has emerged as a most lucid and engaging guide for those who yearn for a more robust and thoughtful public discourse. “In terms we can all understand,” wrote Jonathan Rauch in The New York Times, Justice “confronts us with the concepts that lurk . . . beneath our conflicts.”

Affirmative action, same-sex marriage, physician-assisted suicide, abortion, national service, the moral limits of markets—Sandel relates the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day, and shows how a surer grasp of philosophy can help us make sense of politics, morality, and our own convictions as well.

Justice is lively, thought-provoking, and wise—an essential new addition to the small shelf of books that speak convincingly to the hard questions of our civic life.

(retrieved from Amazon Thu, 12 Mar 2015 18:11:37 -0400)

(see all 3 descriptions)

Popular Harvard professor Michael Sandel offers a searching, lyrical exploration of the meaning of justice that considers familiar controversies such as affirmative action, same-sex marriage, physician-assisted suicide, abortion, national service, patriotism and dissent, and the moral limits of markets in fresh and illuminating ways.… (more)

(summary from another edition)

» see all 4 descriptions

Quick Links

Popular covers


Average: (4.19)
0.5 1
1 1
2 3
3 14
3.5 9
4 49
4.5 8
5 53

Penguin Australia

An edition of this book was published by Penguin Australia.

» Publisher information page

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.


About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 129,534,964 books! | Top bar: Always visible