A CRITIQUE OF THE RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR JUSTICE
Loading...
Date
2023-01-02
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Tangaza University College
Abstract
The world we live in is full of immoralities and crimes that can be collectively termed as
injustices. There are several causes of these offensive acts among which are; uncontrolled desires,
self-interest, and deprivation of resources. And yet justice demands that social benefits ought to
be distributed fairly and impartially, which seems a challenge in the current society. But because
human beings are rational, they use their faculties of the intellect and the will, first of all, to gather
the necessary information on the desired good. Then they go ahead to choose among the available
alternatives in a manner that maximizes their benefits and minimizes their burdens. Having done
that, they devise plans on how to attain their desire which can be corporeal or otherwise, and
finally, they dive into action. This is not accomplished in a single action but in a series of events,
and because it is performed consciously, voluntarily and willingly, it qualifies to be judged as a
moral act. In a situation where such actions are discovered to be immoral or criminal, it means
they upset the state of balance in society, and justice demands a restoration into equilibrium, which
can be achieved through punishment. The intention of punishment is both retributive and deterring,
to avoid future offense, and it should not be heavier than the offense itself. Justice is only fulfilled
when reconciliation is done after the punishment for the sake of healing.
Description
Keywords
A CRITIQUE OF THE RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR JUSTICE