Justice: Rights and Wrongs

by Nicholas Wolterstorff

Wide-ranging and ambitious, Justice combines moral philosophy and Christian ethics to develop an important theory of rights and of justice as grounded in rights. Nicholas Wolterstorff discusses what it is to have a right, and he locates rights in the respect due the worth of the rights-holder. After contending that socially-conferred rights require the existence of natural rights, he argues that no secular account of natural human rights is successful; he offers instead a theistic account.
Wolterstorff prefaces his systematic account of justice as grounded in rights with an exploration of the common claim that rights-talk is inherently individualistic and possessive. He demonstrates that the idea of natural rights originated neither in the Enlightenment nor in the individualistic philosophy of the late Middle Ages, but was already employed by the canon lawyers of the twelfth century. He traces our intuitions about rights and justice back even further, to Hebrew and Christian scriptures. After extensively discussing justice in the Old Testament and the New, he goes on to show why ancient Greek and Roman philosophy could not serve as a framework for a theory of rights.
Connecting rights and wrongs to God's relationship with humankind, Justice not only offers a rich and compelling philosophical account of justice, but also makes an important contribution to overcoming the present-day divide between religious discourse and human rights.

Genres: Philosophy, Theology, Justice, Nonfiction, Christianity, Religion, Social Justice

416 pages, Hardcover

First published December 26, 2007

About the author

Wolterstorff is the Noah Porter Professor Emeritus of Philosophical Theology, and Fellow of Berkeley College at Yale University. A prolific writer with wide-ranging philosophical and theological interests, he has written books on metaphysics, aesthetics, political philosophy, epistemology and theology and philosophy of religion.

Reviews

[Brian Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wolterstoff's premise is that justice is a matter of rendering to people their rights. He defends this thesis against those who argue that the rights focus is the bad fruit of the Enlightenment. To the contrary, says Wolterstorff. In a fascinating historical survey he demonstrates that the theory of rights-grounded justice emerged in the medieval period. He continues to move backward through history to demonstrate that the Bible, though not developing a philosophic theory of justice, implies a rights-based approach.

What do people have rights to? Here Wolterstorff argues against the eudaimonistic approach to ethics (he also rejects the deontological and consequentialist approaches) on the grounds that it is incompatible with a rights-based approach to justice. The Christian, vision, he argues is one not merely a well-lived life but an anticipation of flourishing, or shalom, in all aspects of life. Thus the love command grounds Christian ethics.

What is the grounding for rights? Wolterstorff argues that duties, capacities, and even the image of God in man cannot provide a grounding for natural human rights. He argues that human rights are bestowed by God in that he loves all humans.

In general, I enjoyed following Wolterstoff's argumentation, and I learned a great deal about philosophy and ethics along the way. I'm open to his thesis about justice being grounded in rights, though I'd like to read some further interaction from scholars who take the other positions. I was not persuaded, however, with his dismissal of the image of God as the basis for natural human rights. His discussion of the image itself was excellent. He seemed to build a fairly good case for the image as the basis of these rights before dismissing the idea with little argumentation. It was a strange turn. Overall, I found the book a very profitable read.

[Zach · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title of this book is somewhat misleading. While Wolterstorff intends to expound what it means for someone to be just, he sees justice as simply the recognition and honoring of someone’s rights. So the book is really an attempt to provide a theoretical groundwork for the idea of natural human rights. Part 1 is a historical survey, arguing that rights are not the product of the Enlightenment but are rooted in Scripture and found in the Middle Ages. Part 2 surveys and rejects “eudamonism” as a grounding for rights— we do not derive our rights from our attempt to “live the good life” because much that we have a right to is not essential for living the good life. Finally, part 3 is Wolterstorff’s argument for why we have rights, which boils down to “because we are loved by God.” While this is true, I think his rejection of grounding rights in the imago dei is a mistake, and don’t see the bestowed worth of being loved by God as adding anything that couldn’t already be found in the imago dei.

Finally, Wolterstorff offers no vision of what rights we actually have. He hints at some very broad “rights” which I think are not actually rights at all (ie., the right to be given a polite answer at the doctor’s office). He gives no rationale for distinguishing between what is a right and what is a privilege (does me being loved by God give me the right to a yacht? Why not?). Finally, there is no analysis of the reality that right claims must be grounded in force (if I have a right to not be murdered by you, I may use force to stop you from harming me). The relationship of the use of force/coercion to rights is missing and thus makes the entire theory fall flat.

[Kevin McClain · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wolterstorff contrasts the Eudaimonism of Greek philosophy to the concept of Shalom, or Flourishing, found in the Old and New Testament. He argues that Eudaimonism fails to provide a compassionate response to human suffering, rather, seeing suffering as "good" for a person in that it develops virtue. This yields Stoicism. The end result, however, is a view that humans lack inherent dignity. They have no right to complain, and instead, ultimately get what they deserve/merit from the universe. The Gospel only makes sense when we understand it as a remedy to the Fall and a restoration of the original Creational order, in which all relationships, God, humankind, and Nature, were of mutual benefit and the cosmos was not a zero-sum game. Here we can find a true foundation for ethics.

[Brittany Petruzzi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nicholas Wolterstorff is one of the premier Christian thinkers of our time. If you really want to learn about justice, look here and not Keller's Generous Justice: How God's Grace Makes Us Just. Here you will find the principles behind everything Keller says, only without the sketchiness of his Scriptural proofs or his sometime borderline heresy.

What you will find here is Wolterstorff's painstakingly researched and thought-through take on justice, with conclusions so clear, you'll wonder how you didn't come to them on your own.

[Marc · Rating 4 out of 5]

If we all completely understood philosophical discussions without having to re-read sections in order to go "ah...I get it now" then this would have been a five-star book. Definitely not a book for everyone but the topic and its implications are definitely something everybody should learn and ponder. Could possibly (highly that is) turn out to be very prophetic.

[Ben Fredrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

For me finishing this was like finishing a race. It's a feat because it is a dense, packed, broad-sweeping book that is, at times, dizzying.

That being said, it is deeply important on so many levels. It puts into words what I had felt to be the case about the grounding and nature of human worth and value, of justice and morality. And I came away convinced that natural human rights are founded in a Judeo-Christian tradition. They are not a secular or humanistic construct. And furthermore, stripping natural human rights from its religious foundation will inevitably lead to regression toward Marxism and tribal supremacies.

[Abigail Franklin · Rating 5 out of 5]

After three months, I finally finished. Long & winding & thorough, Wolterstorff does, in fact, spend most of the books distinguishing the definition of a right. I need to dig into Justice in Love, I think, to find what I need for my paper, but if all else fails, I can use this book in conjunction with Lucy Peppiatt’s definition of imago dei for a paper.

I’m still Wolterstorff’s biggest fan. Can’t wait to graduate so I have time to read Lament for a Son.

[Jonathan Prudhomme · Rating 4 out of 5]

In a world where the idea of rights is often abused, this book gives clarity concerning the origin of rights (and corresponding obligations) as rooted in Hebrew and Christian scripture. I especially appreciated how Waltersdorf demonstrated that the Ancient Greek (eudaemonistic) view of man provides no basis for biblical justice.

[Lawrence R · Rating 5 out of 5]

profound

A thoroughly detailed philosophical discussion of justice and human rights within a deistic context. The latter chapters are especially important in understanding what gives worth to human beings.

[Gregory · Rating 3 out of 5]

An impressively comprehensive account. Still deciding what I think of it. Even if one disagrees, you have to take his argument seriously.

[Michael Nichols · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wolterstorff’s countering the right order theorists, and trying to give an account of subjective rights. He argues the OT and NT presuppose subjective rights, and that subjective rights show up in canon law (not just after the rise of modern liberal societies). He’s interesting, but ultimately unconvincing. First, his genealogy of subjective rights is simply wrong; it’s pretty well settled they’re a modern invention. Nobody spoke of subjective rights before the Enlightenment. Second, and most importantly, we can give an account of injustice in which a wrong is committed without a subjective right being violated. (For example, if a spouse commits adultery, we would say that’s an injustice, but it would be very strange to say their spouse had a subjective right not to be cheated on). Wolterstorff’s project has to clear a pretty high bar, and in the end it simply doesn’t. However, his impulse to give an account of justice that resources those suffering injustice and gives them tools to overcome those injustices merits commendation.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A philosophical tour-de-force that considers argues for the conception of justice as grounded in inherent humant rights rather than in right order. Well written and well argued, though I will have to go back and review the argument, as it took many sittings to finish.

[Jeff]

Nick is coming to Calvin on March 31st to introduce the book and its ideas... don't miss it.

[Tim Stafford · Rating 4 out of 5]

As philosophy tends to be, tedious. But rewarding.
He makes the case that human rights are grounded in Judeo-Christian Scriptures, and nowhere else.

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty good, though rather long-winded. I thought his critiques of eudaimonism were off the mark.

[Luke Evans · Rating 5 out of 5]

I suggest only reading the "theory" sections and skipping the "narrative" section.
5 stars to the theory section.