Second-order impartiality and public sphere
In the first part of the text the distinction between first- and second-order impartiality, along with Brian Barry’s thorough elaboration of their characteristics and the differences between them, is examined. While the former impartiality is related to non-favoring fellow-persons in everyday occasions, the latter is manifested in the institutional structure of society and its political and public morality. In the second part of the article, the concept of public impartiality is introduced through analysis of two examples. In the first example, a Caledonian Club with its exclusive membership is considered as a form of association which is partial, but nevertheless morally acceptable. In the second example, the so-called Heinz dilemma has been reconsidered and the author points to some flaws in Barry’s interpretation, arguing that Heinz’s right of giving advantage to his wife’s life over property rights can be recognized through mitigating circumstances, and this partiality can be appreciated in the public sphere. Thus, public impartiality imposes limits to the restrictiveness and rigidity of political impartiality implied in second-order morality.
Barry, Brian (1989), A Theories of Justice: A Treatise On Social Justice, Vol. I. Berkeley- Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Barry, Brian (1995), Justice as Impartiality, A Treatise On Social Justice, Vol. II. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Barry, Brian (1998), „Something in the Disputation not Unpleasant“, in: Kelly, Paul (ed.) Impartiality, Neutrality and Justice: Re-reading Brian Barry’s Justice as Impartiality, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 186–257.
Brink, David O. (2001), “Impartiality and Associative Duties”, Utilitas, 2 (13): 152–172.
Caledonian Club (internet) available at http://www.caledonianclub.com/membership/becoming-a-member/ (viewed 19 November, 2016.)
Cottingham, John (1984), „Partiality, Favouritism, and Morality“, The Philosophical Quarterly 36 (144): 357–373.
Frankfurt, Harry G. (1971), „Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person“, The Journal of Philosophy 68 (1): 5-20.
Hare, Richard Mervyn (1981), Moral Thinking. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kohlberg, Lawrence (1979), “Justice as Reversibility“, in Peter Laslett and James Fiskhin, (eds.), Philosophy, Politics and Society, 5th ser., New Haven, Conn.: Yale
University Press, pp. 257-272.
Nielsen, Kai (1994), “Justice as a Kind of Impartiality”, Laval théologique et philosophique 50 (3): 511–529.
Rawls, John (1955), “Two Concepts of Rules”, The Philosophical Review 1 (64): 3–32.
Rawls, John (1993), Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Scanlon, Thomas M. (1998), What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, Mass. and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Scheffler, Samuel (2010), „Morality and Reasonable Partiality,“ in: Equality and Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 41–75.
Sládeček, Michal (2016), „Can Justice be Really Ethically Neutral?“ Dialogue and Universalism (forthcoming).
Williams, Bernard (1981), „Persons, Character and Morality“, in: Moral Luck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1–19.
Articles published in the Philosophy and Society will be Open-Access articles distributed under a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 License.