Some interesting aspects, but In considering justice – Why focus on winning races?
Races are, by definition, one winner.
Existence isn’t like that.
We do all exist.
There does not need to be, one winner.
Existence does not need to be a competition.
The very notion of “winning” is anathema to justice in this sense.
We can all freely enter into various sorts of races.
Many of us do so in the full knowledge that we will never “win”.
It is our own personal performance, our out there doing it, and our personal improvement that interests us.
In a world of infinite possibility, and finite people, we can all find things that interest us, are meaningful to us.
What seems most important in terms of justice is having the resources, tools, and freedom to invest our existence in whatever way we responsibly choose.
We are now in an age of exponentially expanding computation and automation.
We are not short of energy – there is ample sunlight for every person on the planet to have what any westerner would consider a high basic standard of living. Beyond that basic, there need be no hard limit. Certainly limits on how much energy we can use on the planet, and if we go into space, the sun has enough energy for very person to have as much as humanity as a whole currently uses. That is not a practical limit at this time.
We are not short of matter.
We live on a massive ball of it, and another one orbits nearby.
Most people only need a few tens of tons of mass to do all they reasonable want to do.
Our current economic system does not deliver that sort of justice.
We have the technology to easily deliver that sort of justice.
Automation allows us to produce all that most people reasonably want, with no need to involve anyone else.
That sort of production was never an option in our past.
Our economic system cannot deal with that sort of universal abundance.
Sandel’s thinking is trapped inside a market capitalist box.
Markets cannot give a positive value to universal abundance.
Most people strongly value universal abundance (think of air – vital to all of us, universally abundant, zero market value).
Automation allows us to produce a vast set of goods and services in the same sort of abundance as air.
But markets will always work against such universal abundance, as it destroys market value.
Hence we see an explosion of Intellectual Property (IP) laws – that serve no real purpose other than to maintain scarcity for the masses, and thereby deliver value to the few.
Markets undoubtedly had utility in an age when most things were genuinely scarce.
Automation and universal abundance changes everything.
[followed by in response to “Hey, existentialist:)”]
Kinda – I think we have the ability to influence our development through the exercise of free will, and at the same time I acknowledge the profound complexity (on many levels) of both our genetic and cultural heritages, and the vast array of subconscious processes required for consciousness to exist.
So yes – choice and free will are important, and all human beings exist in complex realities with many different aspects, physical, biological, social, cultural, conceptual, strategic, ….
Individuals are important, and no individual will survive for long without a social and technological context.
So I don’t really fit neatly in the existentialist camp, and I am perhaps closer to that camp than any other.?