Chapter 3:
1. What are John Stuart Mill’s views concerning justice?
Mill views justice from the perspective of moral behavior and terms actions that violate the rights of an individual as those that constitute injustice. According to Mill, the rights of an individual constitute something of general utility, and society has a duty to defend an individual in their possession. But what exactly is justice based on Mill’s assumptions? Mill defined justice based on human well-being. That is, he viewed justice as a set of moral rules that protect individuals from being hurt by other individuals. These moral rules incorporate an individual’s freedom, which, according to Mill, is more important than all the other maxims.
2. Explain Nozick’s entitlement theory.
Nozick states that every individual is autonomous and answerable and ought to be left to fashion their own life free from the interference of others, provided that their actions are compatible with the rights of others. Nozick also held that individuals are entitled to their holdings, including goods, property, and money, given that they have acquired them fairly. Nozick based his theory on three principles. The first one permits an individual to hold a possession if it was acquired in line with the principle of justice in acquisition. The second principle permits an individual to hold a possession if it was acquired in line with the principle of justice in transfer from another person. The third one states that an individual can only acquire a holding in accordance with the 1st and 2nd principles.
3. Define John Rawls’ veil of ignorance.
Rawls imagines that people in their original position are ignorant and that they do not know their social position or status. These individuals do not even know what their situation or position will be once the veil of ignorance is lifted. Rawls’s assumptions aim to place people in their original position, giving them impartial and objective abilities to come to an agreement. This is because the conditions are somehow fair and equal and constitute a good claim to be regarded as the principles of justice.
Chapter 4:
1. How would you describe the difference between capitalism and socialism?
The factors that distinguish capitalism and socialism revolve around ownership and the manner of operation. Capitalism is a form of economic system in which private firms form the main means of production and distribution. Additionally, this economic system operates on the basis of market exchange and profit-making. Socialism, on the other hand, is an economic system in which, unlike capitalism, the main means of production and distribution are in public hands. Socialism operates under a centrally planned economy instead of a market system for the distribution of income and allocation of resources. In capitalism, economic decisions are made by private firms, while in a socialist system, the government makes crucial decisions.
2. What are the main criticisms of capitalism?
The main criticisms of capitalism are based on theoretical and operational arguments that have not convinced everyone that capitalism is a morally justifiable system. The theoretical criticisms challenge capitalism’s basic assumptions, fundamental values, and inherent economic tendencies. The operational arguments, on the other hand, criticize capitalism’s so-called deficiencies in actual practice, especially the failure of capitalism to live up to its own economic ideals. The operational criticism focuses on the actual deficiencies brought about by capitalism, while the theoretical criticisms are based on assumptions relating to the values and economic tendencies of capitalism.
3. Give an explanation as to why manufacturing has declined in the United States.
From the 1960s to date, manufacturing in the U.S. has declined by more than 50 percent. Several explanations describe why manufacturing has declined in the U.S. over the past half-century. One major factor that has contributed the most to this decline is the availability of cheap products from foreign competitors. Local U.S. manufacturers have seen their competitive advantage outclassed by their foreign counterparts. The rise of the service industry has also contributed to the decline of manufacturing in the U.S. This best explains why, for instance, Walmart employs more individuals than the Big Three automakers do. Again, the number of people working in government exceeds the number who work in manufacturing.
Chapter 5:
1. How would you debate the idea that corporations can make moral decisions?
From a legal perspective, corporations have been granted rights similar to those of moral agents. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that corporations possess a basic First Amendment right to take part in the political process without being prevented by the government from spending money to back their favorite candidates. Therefore, corporations, just as individuals, ought to be held morally responsible for their actions. Although corporations lack conscience, they can make decisions or implement policies that, according to the outcome, can be applauded or blamed, and for that matter, corporations can make moral decisions.
2. Who is a corporation’s top obligation?
Advocates of the narrow view identify stockholders as the owners of a corporation, thus holding that the corporation’s top obligation is to its stockholders. However, this assumption of the advocates of the narrow view only applies to small firms but seems nonsensical for the modern corporate reality. In the modern corporate reality, a small number of investors would directly invest money in a corporation. Instead, a majority of them repurchase shares that were previously issued, with a high probability of selling these shares again. In modern corporate reality, management has actual control of the corporation rather than the stockholders. A majority of observers in today’s business world acknowledge management’s control because it handpicks the board of directors, hence controlling the body that is supposed to monitor it.
3. Why is it misguided to think that corporations could address non-business matters?
The narrow view cites two main reasons why corporations cannot be trusted when it comes to addressing non-business matters, such as promoting the welfare of society. These are a lack of expertise and the imposition of their materialistic values on society. According to the narrow view, corporations only have expertise in making economic decisions, making it difficult for them to make social and moral decisions, as they cannot balance public goods and profit-making. Corporations also impose their materialistic values on all of society because they feel that if they pursue non-business goals, they might be equivalent to a church while still making profits (Macleod, C., 2020; Mill, J. S., 1859; Mill, J. S., 1863).
References
Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/11224
Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty. Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34901
Macleod, C. (2020). John Stuart Mill. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/
Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards
Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.
