Differences, Inequalities and the Politics of Law
A.Y. 2024/2025
Learning objectives
The course aims at introducing students to philosophical debates on social justice with a focus on three topics: economic inequality, gender oppression and the discipline of sexuality. Special attention will be paid to the analysis of relevant concepts and to the discussion of the potentials and limits of legal reform in promoting social change.
Expected learning outcomes
At the end of the course students should have acquired:
- knowledge of the main positions in current philosophical debates on economic inequality, including a better understanding of the concepts and different interpretations of equality of opportunity, meritocracy, distributive justice, and structural injustices;
- knowledge of the main positions in current philosophical debates on gender oppression and the discipline of sexuality, including a better understanding of the concepts of sex, gender, gender identity, and of their relations;
- capability to apply acquired knowledge and understanding to the discussion of solutions to problems of economic inequality, gender oppression, and discipline of sexuality, with special attention to proposals for legal reform.
In order to exercise their learning, critical and communication skills, students will be required to read texts, to discuss them and to express and defend personal opinions.
- knowledge of the main positions in current philosophical debates on economic inequality, including a better understanding of the concepts and different interpretations of equality of opportunity, meritocracy, distributive justice, and structural injustices;
- knowledge of the main positions in current philosophical debates on gender oppression and the discipline of sexuality, including a better understanding of the concepts of sex, gender, gender identity, and of their relations;
- capability to apply acquired knowledge and understanding to the discussion of solutions to problems of economic inequality, gender oppression, and discipline of sexuality, with special attention to proposals for legal reform.
In order to exercise their learning, critical and communication skills, students will be required to read texts, to discuss them and to express and defend personal opinions.
Lesson period: Second trimester
Assessment methods: Esame
Assessment result: voto verbalizzato in trentesimi
Single course
This course can be attended as a single course.
Course syllabus and organization
Single session
Responsible
Lesson period
Second trimester
Course syllabus
The course will introduce students to contemporary philosophical debates about the justice of a political society. After an introductory discussion of the concept of political justice and its object, the course will analyse the implications of the normative idea of the fundamental political equality of all members of the same polity, understood as the core normative idea of democratic politics. This idea assigns to each member of a polity a fundamental right to equal consideration. The idea of equal consideration will be analysed in terms of equal concern and equal respect. Depending on how it is understood, the idea of equal respect can provide a basis for the idea of political toleration or for the idea of political neutrality. These ideas have some implications for the restriction of individual freedom, which will be considered in general terms and with specific reference to freedom of expression, paternalistic restrictions and individual freedom in the public sphere. The course then moves on to discuss issues of economic and structural justice. It will examine the social ideals of equality of opportunity and meritocracy and their relationship to economic and structural inequality. Particular attention will be paid to analysing how persistent patterns of sexist and racist classification produce social inequality. Most contemporary theories of social justice entrust public institutions with the task of reducing social inequality through social policy, including taxation and public spending. The design of social policy raises delicate political questions that philosophy can help to clarify. A number of lectures will address some of these issues. Finally, the implications of identity politics for justice will be considered.
The lectures will cover the following topics:
- The concept and object of political justice
- The right to equal consideration
- Individual freedom and its value
- Individual responsibility
- Justice and punishment
- Limits to individual freedom
- Liberalism and paternalism
- Freedom of expression and its limits
- Individual freedom in sexual matters
- From political tolerance to political neutrality
- Family law and political neutrality
- Equality of opportunity
- Meritocracy and the labour market
- Justice and wealth distribution
- Justice, work and workers' rights
- Justice and social policy
- Justice and fiscal policy
- Justice and identity politics
- Justice, gender and freedom
The lectures will cover the following topics:
- The concept and object of political justice
- The right to equal consideration
- Individual freedom and its value
- Individual responsibility
- Justice and punishment
- Limits to individual freedom
- Liberalism and paternalism
- Freedom of expression and its limits
- Individual freedom in sexual matters
- From political tolerance to political neutrality
- Family law and political neutrality
- Equality of opportunity
- Meritocracy and the labour market
- Justice and wealth distribution
- Justice, work and workers' rights
- Justice and social policy
- Justice and fiscal policy
- Justice and identity politics
- Justice, gender and freedom
Prerequisites for admission
No previous knowledge is required.
Teaching methods
For attending students, learning will be facilitated by lectures, discussion and individual reading.
Non-attending students will be required to prepare for the exam through individual reading.
Non-attending students will be required to prepare for the exam through individual reading.
Teaching Resources
All students, attending and non-attending, should study the following texts, possibly in the order given:
Nagel, T., Equality and Partiality, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991, chapters 1-7 (pp. 3-74).
Rawls, J., Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 2001, paragraphs 12-22, 41-42, 44-47, 49 (pp. 39-79, 135-140, 145-157, and 158-162).
Dworkin, R.M., "Liberalism" (1978), in Id., A Matter of Principle, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1985, pp. 181-204.
Sandel, M.J., "Moral Argument and Liberal Toleration: Abortion and Homosexuality", California Law Review, vol. 77, no. 3, 1989, pp. 521-538.
Bourdieu, P., "The Forms of Capital", in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. by J. Richardson, Greenwood, Westport, 1986, pp. 241-258.
Scanlon, T.M., Why Does Inequality Matter?, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018, chapters 4-5 (pp. 40-73).
Anderson, E., "Equality and Freedom in the Workplace: Recovering Republican Insights", Social Philosophy and Policy, vol. 31, no. 2, 2015, pp. 48-69.
Haslanger, S. "Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want Them to Be?", Noûs, vol. 34, no. 1, 2000, pp. 31-55.
Young, I.M., Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1990, chapter 2 (pp. 39-63).
Fraser, N., "Feminist Politics in the Age of Recognition: A Two-Dimensional Approach to Gender Justice", Studies in Social Justice, vol. 1, no. 1, 2007, pp. 23-35.
In addition, attending students must read the texts indicated in one of the groups below, while non-attending students must read the texts indicated in two of the groups below.
Group A
The readings in this group are recommended for students interested in the subject of limitations on individual freedom. The two chapters of Mill's On Liberty offer the classic formulation of the harm principle as a principle for deciding whether and when individual freedom can be restricted. Raz's chapters defend the idea that the role of institutions is to promote personal autonomy and propose an interpretation of the harm principle based on this idea. The contributions by Feinberg, Gerald Dworkin and Arneson discuss the problem of paternalistic restrictions on individual freedom. Finally, Ronald Dworkin's chapter defends the idea that only fundamental rights to particular freedoms can be justified, not a fundamental right to freedom in general.
Mill, J.S., On Liberty, J.W. Parker and Son, London, 1859 or subsequent editions, chapters 3-4.
Raz, J., The Morality of Freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986, chapters 14-15 (pp. 369-429).
Feinberg, J., "Legal Paternalism", Canadian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 1, no. 1, 1971, pp. 105-124.
Dworkin, G., "Paternalism", The Monist, vol. 56, no. 1, 1972, pp. 64-84.
Arneson, R.J., "Mill versus Paternalism", Ethics, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 470-489.
Dworkin, R.M., "What Rights Do We Have?", in Id., Taking Rights Seriously, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1977, pp. 266-278.
Group B
The readings in this group are suggested for students interested in the problem of restricting freedom of expression. The chapter from Mill's essay On Liberty offers the classic defence of freedom of speech and of the press, based on the ideal of the positive consequences of a free marketplace of ideas. Scanlon's articles offer a liberal defence of the right to free speech based on deontological, rather than purely coseguentialist, considerations. Altman's text, while not recent, discusses a highly topical issue: the legitimacy of hate speech codes on university campuses. Finally, Waldron's chapters present the best-known defence of hate speech restrictions in contemporary philosophical discussion.
Mill, J.S., On Liberty, J.W. Parker and Son, London, 1859 or subsequent editions, chapter 2.
Scanlon, T.M., "A Theory of Freedom of Expression" (1972) and "Freedom of Expression and Categories of Expression" (1979), in Id., The Difficulty of Tolerance: Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK), 2003, pp. 6-25, and 84-112.
Altman, A. "Liberalism and Campus Hate Speech: A Philosophical Examination", Ethics, vol. 103, no. 2, 1993, pp. 302-317.
Waldron, J., The Harm in Hate Speech, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 2012, chapters 4-5, pp. 65-143.
Group C
The readings in this group are slightly longer than those in the other groups, but in some cases simpler. In particular, Srinivasan's book has a popular rather than academic slant. This group is recommended for those who want to explore some of the issues related to the relationship between freedom and sex. Nussbaum's first paper analyses the concept of objectification, which is often used to evaluate sexual practices that are considered to be detrimental to human dignity. Her second paper proposes a liberal defence of sex work. MacKinnon and Srinivasan deal with pornography from a feminist perspective and, more generally, with the need to critically evaluate sexual imagery and desires. Finally, Garcia's chapters examine the role of sexual consent and its limits.
Nussbaum, M.C., "Objectification", Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 24, no. 4, 1995, pp. 249-291.
Nussbaum, M.C., ""Whether from Reason or Prejudice": Taking Money for Bodily Services", The Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 27, no. 2 Suppl., 1998, pp. 693-723.
MacKinnon, C.A., "Sexuality, Pornography, and Method: "Pleasure under Patriarchy"", Ethics, vol. 99, no. 2, 1989, pp. 314-346.
Srinivasan, A., The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century, Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 2021, chapters 2-3 (pp. 33-92).
Garcia, M., The Joy of Consent: A Philosophy of Good Sex, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 2023, chapters 2, 3, 6 (pp. 36-83, 149-185) (original French edition 2021).
Group D
The readings in this group are suggested for students who are interested in learning more about equal opportunities and meritocracy. Anderson's book analyses how segregation threatens equal opportunity and is one of the main causes of social injustice. The analysis is based on the case of racial segregation in the United States, but can be easily generalised. Against segregation, Anderson argues for a policy of integration, carefully distinguishing the idea of integration from the idea of assimilation. Young's and Sandel's essays consider how the meritocratic ideal of equal opportunity is falsely impartial, ends up reproducing and legitimising the distinctive inequalities of our societies, and tends to obscure structural injustices related to the division of labour.
Anderson, E., The Imperative of Integration, Princeton UP, Princeton, 2010, chapters 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, pp. 23-66, 112-179.
Young, I.M., Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1990, chapter 7 (pp. 192-225).
Sandel, M., "How Meritocracy Fuels Inequality - Part 1 The Tyranny of Merit: An Overview", American Journal of Law and Equality, vol. 1, no. 1, 2021, pp. 4-14.
Group E
The readings in this group are suggested for students interested in social justice issues related to redistributive policies. The chapters in White's book, The Civic Minimum, propose a theory of justice based on an idea of reciprocity, according to which it is just that all those who claim to share in the benefits of social cooperation should contribute to it. In the light of this theory, he discusses a number of social policies, such as those that make access to social benefits conditional on the willingness to work, basic income and basic capital. The other papers deal with issues of fiscal justice. Murphy and Nagel's paper distinguishes between the different objectives that can be pursued through tax policy, while White's paper defends inheritance tax against some possible objections.
White, S., The Civic Minimum: On the Rights and Obligations of Economic Citizenship, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003, chapters 3-4, 6-8 (pp. 49-96, 129-200).
Murphy, L., Nagel, T., "Taxes, Redistribution, and Public Provision", Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 30, no. 1, 2001, pp. 53-71.
White, S., "Moral Objections to Inheritance Taxes", in Taxation: Philosophical Perspectives, ed. by M. O'Neill and S. Orr, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018, pp. 167-184.
Group F
The readings in this group are appropriate for students interested in exploring justice issues related to the role and transformations of the welfare state. Chapters from Young's book, Responsibility for Justice, critically analyze the positions of those welfare reformers who make the condition of poverty dependent on individual responsibility and argue that issues of structural injustice must be considered in order to understand poverty. Chapters from Tronto's book, Caring Democracy, starting from the recognition of the vulnerable condition of human beings, argue that care is a collective responsibility and critically analyze the limitations of the way care is managed in our societies.
Young, I.M., Responsibility for Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013, chapters 1-2 (pp. 3-74).
Tronto, J.C., Caring Democracy: Markets, Equality, and Justice, New York University Press, New York, 2013, chapters 1, 3-5 (pp. 17-45, 67-136).
Nagel, T., Equality and Partiality, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991, chapters 1-7 (pp. 3-74).
Rawls, J., Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 2001, paragraphs 12-22, 41-42, 44-47, 49 (pp. 39-79, 135-140, 145-157, and 158-162).
Dworkin, R.M., "Liberalism" (1978), in Id., A Matter of Principle, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1985, pp. 181-204.
Sandel, M.J., "Moral Argument and Liberal Toleration: Abortion and Homosexuality", California Law Review, vol. 77, no. 3, 1989, pp. 521-538.
Bourdieu, P., "The Forms of Capital", in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. by J. Richardson, Greenwood, Westport, 1986, pp. 241-258.
Scanlon, T.M., Why Does Inequality Matter?, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018, chapters 4-5 (pp. 40-73).
Anderson, E., "Equality and Freedom in the Workplace: Recovering Republican Insights", Social Philosophy and Policy, vol. 31, no. 2, 2015, pp. 48-69.
Haslanger, S. "Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want Them to Be?", Noûs, vol. 34, no. 1, 2000, pp. 31-55.
Young, I.M., Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1990, chapter 2 (pp. 39-63).
Fraser, N., "Feminist Politics in the Age of Recognition: A Two-Dimensional Approach to Gender Justice", Studies in Social Justice, vol. 1, no. 1, 2007, pp. 23-35.
In addition, attending students must read the texts indicated in one of the groups below, while non-attending students must read the texts indicated in two of the groups below.
Group A
The readings in this group are recommended for students interested in the subject of limitations on individual freedom. The two chapters of Mill's On Liberty offer the classic formulation of the harm principle as a principle for deciding whether and when individual freedom can be restricted. Raz's chapters defend the idea that the role of institutions is to promote personal autonomy and propose an interpretation of the harm principle based on this idea. The contributions by Feinberg, Gerald Dworkin and Arneson discuss the problem of paternalistic restrictions on individual freedom. Finally, Ronald Dworkin's chapter defends the idea that only fundamental rights to particular freedoms can be justified, not a fundamental right to freedom in general.
Mill, J.S., On Liberty, J.W. Parker and Son, London, 1859 or subsequent editions, chapters 3-4.
Raz, J., The Morality of Freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986, chapters 14-15 (pp. 369-429).
Feinberg, J., "Legal Paternalism", Canadian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 1, no. 1, 1971, pp. 105-124.
Dworkin, G., "Paternalism", The Monist, vol. 56, no. 1, 1972, pp. 64-84.
Arneson, R.J., "Mill versus Paternalism", Ethics, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 470-489.
Dworkin, R.M., "What Rights Do We Have?", in Id., Taking Rights Seriously, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1977, pp. 266-278.
Group B
The readings in this group are suggested for students interested in the problem of restricting freedom of expression. The chapter from Mill's essay On Liberty offers the classic defence of freedom of speech and of the press, based on the ideal of the positive consequences of a free marketplace of ideas. Scanlon's articles offer a liberal defence of the right to free speech based on deontological, rather than purely coseguentialist, considerations. Altman's text, while not recent, discusses a highly topical issue: the legitimacy of hate speech codes on university campuses. Finally, Waldron's chapters present the best-known defence of hate speech restrictions in contemporary philosophical discussion.
Mill, J.S., On Liberty, J.W. Parker and Son, London, 1859 or subsequent editions, chapter 2.
Scanlon, T.M., "A Theory of Freedom of Expression" (1972) and "Freedom of Expression and Categories of Expression" (1979), in Id., The Difficulty of Tolerance: Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK), 2003, pp. 6-25, and 84-112.
Altman, A. "Liberalism and Campus Hate Speech: A Philosophical Examination", Ethics, vol. 103, no. 2, 1993, pp. 302-317.
Waldron, J., The Harm in Hate Speech, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 2012, chapters 4-5, pp. 65-143.
Group C
The readings in this group are slightly longer than those in the other groups, but in some cases simpler. In particular, Srinivasan's book has a popular rather than academic slant. This group is recommended for those who want to explore some of the issues related to the relationship between freedom and sex. Nussbaum's first paper analyses the concept of objectification, which is often used to evaluate sexual practices that are considered to be detrimental to human dignity. Her second paper proposes a liberal defence of sex work. MacKinnon and Srinivasan deal with pornography from a feminist perspective and, more generally, with the need to critically evaluate sexual imagery and desires. Finally, Garcia's chapters examine the role of sexual consent and its limits.
Nussbaum, M.C., "Objectification", Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 24, no. 4, 1995, pp. 249-291.
Nussbaum, M.C., ""Whether from Reason or Prejudice": Taking Money for Bodily Services", The Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 27, no. 2 Suppl., 1998, pp. 693-723.
MacKinnon, C.A., "Sexuality, Pornography, and Method: "Pleasure under Patriarchy"", Ethics, vol. 99, no. 2, 1989, pp. 314-346.
Srinivasan, A., The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century, Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 2021, chapters 2-3 (pp. 33-92).
Garcia, M., The Joy of Consent: A Philosophy of Good Sex, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 2023, chapters 2, 3, 6 (pp. 36-83, 149-185) (original French edition 2021).
Group D
The readings in this group are suggested for students who are interested in learning more about equal opportunities and meritocracy. Anderson's book analyses how segregation threatens equal opportunity and is one of the main causes of social injustice. The analysis is based on the case of racial segregation in the United States, but can be easily generalised. Against segregation, Anderson argues for a policy of integration, carefully distinguishing the idea of integration from the idea of assimilation. Young's and Sandel's essays consider how the meritocratic ideal of equal opportunity is falsely impartial, ends up reproducing and legitimising the distinctive inequalities of our societies, and tends to obscure structural injustices related to the division of labour.
Anderson, E., The Imperative of Integration, Princeton UP, Princeton, 2010, chapters 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, pp. 23-66, 112-179.
Young, I.M., Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1990, chapter 7 (pp. 192-225).
Sandel, M., "How Meritocracy Fuels Inequality - Part 1 The Tyranny of Merit: An Overview", American Journal of Law and Equality, vol. 1, no. 1, 2021, pp. 4-14.
Group E
The readings in this group are suggested for students interested in social justice issues related to redistributive policies. The chapters in White's book, The Civic Minimum, propose a theory of justice based on an idea of reciprocity, according to which it is just that all those who claim to share in the benefits of social cooperation should contribute to it. In the light of this theory, he discusses a number of social policies, such as those that make access to social benefits conditional on the willingness to work, basic income and basic capital. The other papers deal with issues of fiscal justice. Murphy and Nagel's paper distinguishes between the different objectives that can be pursued through tax policy, while White's paper defends inheritance tax against some possible objections.
White, S., The Civic Minimum: On the Rights and Obligations of Economic Citizenship, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003, chapters 3-4, 6-8 (pp. 49-96, 129-200).
Murphy, L., Nagel, T., "Taxes, Redistribution, and Public Provision", Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 30, no. 1, 2001, pp. 53-71.
White, S., "Moral Objections to Inheritance Taxes", in Taxation: Philosophical Perspectives, ed. by M. O'Neill and S. Orr, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018, pp. 167-184.
Group F
The readings in this group are appropriate for students interested in exploring justice issues related to the role and transformations of the welfare state. Chapters from Young's book, Responsibility for Justice, critically analyze the positions of those welfare reformers who make the condition of poverty dependent on individual responsibility and argue that issues of structural injustice must be considered in order to understand poverty. Chapters from Tronto's book, Caring Democracy, starting from the recognition of the vulnerable condition of human beings, argue that care is a collective responsibility and critically analyze the limitations of the way care is managed in our societies.
Young, I.M., Responsibility for Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013, chapters 1-2 (pp. 3-74).
Tronto, J.C., Caring Democracy: Markets, Equality, and Justice, New York University Press, New York, 2013, chapters 1, 3-5 (pp. 17-45, 67-136).
Assessment methods and Criteria
Assessment methods and criteria will be different for attending and non-attending students.
Students should register as attending students by the end of the second week of classes by following the instructions on the course's MyAriel website. Students who have not registered as attending students by this date will have to prepare for the exam as non-attending students.
Attending students must attend 3/5 of the classes (12 out of 20) to maintain their status.
Attendance will be assessed, but students may miss up to six classes without penalty.
For attending students, the final assessment will be based on attendance, participation, a written exam and a final oral exam. The final oral exam may add or subtract a maximum of 3 points from the mark obtained from the other factors.
For non-attending students, the final assessment will be based on a written and an oral exam.
For more information on the assessment methods and criteria, please refer to the document uploaded to the course's MyAriel website.
Students should register as attending students by the end of the second week of classes by following the instructions on the course's MyAriel website. Students who have not registered as attending students by this date will have to prepare for the exam as non-attending students.
Attending students must attend 3/5 of the classes (12 out of 20) to maintain their status.
Attendance will be assessed, but students may miss up to six classes without penalty.
For attending students, the final assessment will be based on attendance, participation, a written exam and a final oral exam. The final oral exam may add or subtract a maximum of 3 points from the mark obtained from the other factors.
For non-attending students, the final assessment will be based on a written and an oral exam.
For more information on the assessment methods and criteria, please refer to the document uploaded to the course's MyAriel website.
IUS/20 - PHILOSOPHY OF LAW - University credits: 6
Lessons: 40 hours
Professor:
Riva Nicola
Shifts:
Turno
Professor:
Riva NicolaProfessor(s)
Reception:
The professor meets with students weekly, on campus or online. To make an appointment, please contact the professor by email.
On-campus meetings will be held in the professor's office on the second floor of the building overlooking via Passione (room 206). Online meetings will be held through Microsoft Teams.