Amartya Sen,( an anccesible and exceptional humanitarian – Jon snow,
New Statesman) is Lamont University, Professor of Philosophy and Professor of Economics, at Harvard university. He won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1998 and was Master of
Trinity College, Cambridge, 1998-2004. His many books include Development as Freedom,
Rationality and Freedom, The Argumentative Indian, and Identity and Violence.
Philosophy
Amartya Sen said that Justice should not be in Binary terms – It is a matter of Degree. We can understand this with the help of an example, let us assume that there is a flute and there are 3 persons who want that flute A, B and C. A is the person who knows how to play the flute and is a professional flutist. B is a person who is …show more content…
We have seen the recent case filed by these women, in which the ruled that triple talaq(talaq ul biddat) is hence no more valid. If we analyse this, was justice really served according to Amartya Sen? He says that there must not be any injustice, if we go by this then, people who opposed triple talaq has received justice against the injustice by removing injustice, but the people who supported triple talaq like the Muslim priests, the scholars and the traditionalist who supported triple talaq, their right as an individual was taken away, here in the case where justice had to be serve for the common good was now served only to the few sections of that community and thereby depriving the man and taking away his right to give instant talaq. This judgement would also serve as injustice to those advocates and the Muslim priests where the verdict ruled completely against their favour.
Here, we can see that what is just to one individual may not be just to another individual as
Amartya Sen said, but he does not specify as to how the justice system needs to function when there is ambiguity as to what exactly leads to justice? Or what constitutes what is justice. He is silent on this aspect and does not state anything regarding the
New Statesman) is Lamont University, Professor of Philosophy and Professor of Economics, at Harvard university. He won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1998 and was Master of
Trinity College, Cambridge, 1998-2004. His many books include Development as Freedom,
Rationality and Freedom, The Argumentative Indian, and Identity and Violence.
Philosophy
Amartya Sen said that Justice should not be in Binary terms – It is a matter of Degree. We can understand this with the help of an example, let us assume that there is a flute and there are 3 persons who want that flute A, B and C. A is the person who knows how to play the flute and is a professional flutist. B is a person who is …show more content…
We have seen the recent case filed by these women, in which the ruled that triple talaq(talaq ul biddat) is hence no more valid. If we analyse this, was justice really served according to Amartya Sen? He says that there must not be any injustice, if we go by this then, people who opposed triple talaq has received justice against the injustice by removing injustice, but the people who supported triple talaq like the Muslim priests, the scholars and the traditionalist who supported triple talaq, their right as an individual was taken away, here in the case where justice had to be serve for the common good was now served only to the few sections of that community and thereby depriving the man and taking away his right to give instant talaq. This judgement would also serve as injustice to those advocates and the Muslim priests where the verdict ruled completely against their favour.
Here, we can see that what is just to one individual may not be just to another individual as
Amartya Sen said, but he does not specify as to how the justice system needs to function when there is ambiguity as to what exactly leads to justice? Or what constitutes what is justice. He is silent on this aspect and does not state anything regarding the