Is justice derived from a primitive instinct (Buckner) or from a citizens' agreement to seek greater equality in society (Rawls)?

Is justice the interest of the stronger (Thrasymachus) -- or rule by the stronger but in the interest of all society (Plato and Rawls)?

Does justice require that everyone have a place in society according to their talents and education?  For a couple of views on this, research Plato's Republic and Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.

Does justice require that people receive in proportion to their deserving?  Homework: read some more of Aristotle's Ethics and find some critical commentaries.
 
Explain the justice theories of each of these in a paragraph: Plato, Aristotle and Rawls.

If a business leader denies any responsibility to care for others, and tries to serve the shareholders interests only, does that imply the executive is unjustly exploiting others in society? [Hints: Marx, Friedman, Ford Pinto memo, UN Human Development Report.]

Is justice best achieved by the competition of firms seeking greater profits (Friedman) -- or by a government of citizens seeking equality among humans (Marx; Rawls)?  Are these designs incompatible?

Does economic justice consist of equality of opportunity for all -- or equality of income and hence power?

Is the Ford Pinto memo wrong because you can't put a price on human life -- or wrong because the price was far too low?

Do some workers deserve more money than others?  Does your answer to this depend purely on demand and supply or on some biblical notion of desert (what you deserve)?

Economic justice may not be a strong issue for the Bible, or even for the New Testament; but is Jesus consistently depicted as favoring the poor over the rich (Matthew; Luke) -- and if so, should we find in that a basis for Christian socialism?
 

Is globalization producing justice only for multinational companies -- or also for global workers and consumers?

If we believe that a market produces wealth within a country, why not believe that global markets will make everyone richer?

Does it really worsen the world's culture to have CNN, McDonalds and Hollywood videos in every major international city?

Does modernization really mean westernization of other cultures?  Should people in other cultures resent this process?

For centuries, foreigners have found that the Chinese viewed themselves as the superior culture and all others as barbarians.  How should the US prepare for the year 2050, when some commentators believe China will be the superpower? 

Is the US now setting a good example to future great powers?

Would the world be better off if religious fundamentalism became powerful instead of western values?

Will nation states continue to contest power in the world -- or is that already out of date, with the new contest being cultural between (say) Christianity and western business interests facing up to Islam and oil interests?

Would the world look differently to Americans if CNN had a camera crew in every country, instead of having most staff in Atlanta?

If markets only produce justice when properly regulated, what body could regulate the world market?  Which countries control regulations at present? (Research for homework the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, OECD, and Group of Seven).

"Globalization is not new: for instance, in order to encourage US trade in the mediterranean, President Jefferson had to send the marines to confront the barbary (Libyan) pirates in the 1800s."  Research for homework and discuss with an historical perspective whether a global market has really existed since the renaissance seafarers explored non-European continents.
 

If money is power, does the rapid increase of women in the western workplace and the rapid increase in their pay since 1970 mean women have achieved power in society?

In what ways does justice require that we treat males and females differently?
 

If homosexuality is genetic, does that necessarily make it unjust to discriminate against homosexuals?

Should homosexuals be permitted to serve openly in all professions?

In a society highly valuing homosexuality, could heterosexuals behave as homosexuals?

Is there any evidence that we all have both homo and heterosxual tendencies?
 

Is beauty by its very nature unjust to those judged ugly?

Are any standards of beauty universal?
 

Could ML King's work have succeeded without the more radical pressure from Malcolm X?

Is (a) nonviolent civil disobedience or (b) violent pressure for reform, ever justified in a liberal democracy?

To what extent has King been over valued as a civil rights leader compared to others like Parks, Abernathy, Marshall, Farmer, Wilkins and Carr?  Homework: research other civil rights leaders and compare their contributions.

Are health care, food, shelter and security the basic human rights?  If so, why does the US preach about human rights when it does not guarantee health care, food or housing to all its people

Is there a human right to security -- and has the US a dreadful violent crime rate compared to other developed countries?

What makes a desirable good or service into a "human right"?  Is it nothing more than a wish list?

Is the universal declaration of human rights nothing more than an imposition of American values upon other nations?
 

To achieve a utopia, is the massacre of those not fitting the ideal ever justified?

Where the Germans all responsible for the holocaust -- or only the Nazis and the people who dealt with Jews directly?

Does justice demand compensation for the descendants of holocaust victims -- and if so, who should determine that and who should pay? 
 

Are Shakesperean plays really more about brutal power than about Justice?

Discuss this term's Shakespeare play in the light of Tudor concepts of Justice.

In this term's Shakespeare play, discuss the influence of some of these themes: Christian values, witchcraft, use of force to win power, and the divine right to rule. 

Do the characters in this term's Shakespeare play indicate fairness to women, to the ruler, and to the ruled in the thinking of the playwright?

Is science inherently a force for greater justice -- or injustice?

Given that many thousands of people died in the explosion of the atomic bombs on Japanese cities, and many suffered illnesses from the testing of the weapons in the US -- can the development of weapons of mass destruction ever be considered "just"?

In what sense if any is it hypocritical for the US to complain about other nations' development of weapons of mass destruction -- given that the US pioneered in their development?

Is there justice in war if one side fails to obey the rules?

Is war inherently unjust, regardless of treaties and conventions?

If the US faces irregular enemy troops who do not respect the conventions of war, should it still restrain its own troops to obey those conventions?

Is it ever just to terrorize civilians in time of war?

Can a state ever justify torturing suspected spies and terrorists to obtain information to prevent an atrocity?

Is it just to lay ambushes in war, to deceive the enemy, to damage civilians and their property, and to take hostages and prisioners among civilians? 

Is the goal of a state always to seek justice?  How should the state try to achieve such a goal?

What type of government is more likely to achieve justice: a democracy or a principality?

Are there any types of government that can be more just than a democracy? 

In what ways does justice require that a national leader serve the people's true interest -- rather than their actual demands?

Can there be justice without a constitution?  Are all constitutions better at achieving justice than states without constitutions?

Can there be justice if the Constitution grants power to an aristocracy rather than to the people?

Taking District Attorney Ellen Brooks' speech, and the Justice anthology readings, explain whether the US constitution restrains prosecutors too firmly from obtaining convictions of criminals.

"We are always frustrated by a government of laws and not of men.  But we are also protected by that system."  Discuss fully, adopting any point of view on this argument.