A Philosophy of Justice

Is there such a thing as justice? Or we should say, is it really possible to be fair?

Retributive justice demands that the punishment fit the crime; distributive justice examines how resources and opportunities are distributed among individuals or groups within society; and social justice requires that everyone should have equal access to rights.
But how do we reconcile all the nuances?

Does the wife who murders her husband demand the same punishment as a serial killer? Is it justifiable to grant US citizens rights not afforded to foreigners? What do we do about US businesses exploiting foreign workers in sweatshops overseas, yet still paying them a higher wage than they usually get?
These are difficult questions with no ultimate answers, but let's dive in anyway!

Thrasymachus makes three statements regarding justice: 1) justice is "nothing other than the advantage of the stronger," 2) justice is obeying the laws of the ruler, and 3) justice is "really someone else's good, the advantage of the man who is stronger and rules".

Thomas Hobbes believed that justice is an artificial virtue, necessary for civil society, a function of the voluntary agreements that constitute a social contract.

Socrates argued that justice is intrinsically good and beneficial for the individual, rather than merely a social construct for personal gain. A just person is a happy person, and that justice in the state is rooted in harmony and order.

David Hume argues that justice essentially serves public utility by protecting property.

John Rawls believed in the concept of justice as fairness. Every person should receive equal fundamental liberties, and the highest possible benefits should be offered to the less advantaged members of society.