|
Objection 1: It would seem that the two species of justice are
unsuitably assigned, viz. distributive and commutative. That which
is hurtful to the many cannot be a species of justice, since justice is
directed to the common good. Now it is hurtful to the common good of
the many, if the goods of the community are distributed among many,
both because the goods of the community would be exhausted, and because
the morals of men would be corrupted. For Tully says (De Offic.
ii, 15): "He who receives becomes worse, and the more ready to
expect that he will receive again." Therefore distribution does not
belong to any species of justice.
Objection 2: Further, the act of justice is to render to each one
what is his own, as stated above (Question 58, Article 2).
But when things are distributed, a man does not receive what was his,
but becomes possessed of something which belonged to the community.
Therefore this does not pertain to justice.
Objection 3: Further, justice is not only in the sovereign, but
also in the subject, as stated above (Question 58, Article 6).
But it belongs exclusively to the sovereign to distribute. Therefore
distribution does not always belong to justice.
Objection 4: Further, "Distributive justice regards common
goods" (Ethic. v, 4). Now matters regarding the community
pertain to legal justice. Therefore distributive justice is a part,
not of particular, but of legal justice.
Objection 5: Further, unity or multitude do not change the species
of a virtue. Now commutative justice consists in rendering something
to one person, while distributive justice consists in giving something
to many. Therefore they are not different species of justice.
On the contrary, The Philosopher assigns two parts to justice and
says (Ethic. v, 2) that "one directs distributions, the other,
commutations."
I answer that, As stated above (Question 58, Articles
7,8), particular justice is directed to the private individual,
who is compared to the community as a part to the whole. Now a twofold
order may be considered in relation to a part. In the first place
there is the order of one part to another, to which corresponds the
order of one private individual to another. This order is directed by
commutative justice, which is concerned about the mutual dealings
between two persons. In the second place there is the order of the
whole towards the parts, to which corresponds the order of that which
belongs to the community in relation to each single person. This order
is directed by distributive justice, which distributes common goods
proportionately. Hence there are two species of justice, distributive
and commutative.
Reply to Objection 1: Just as a private individual is praised for
moderation in his bounty, and blamed for excess therein, so too ought
moderation to be observed in the distribution of common goods, wherein
distributive justice directs.
Reply to Objection 2: Even as part and whole are somewhat the
same, so too that which pertains to the whole, pertains somewhat to
the part also: so that when the goods of the community are distributed
among a number of individuals each one receives that which, in a way,
is his own.
Reply to Objection 3: The act of distributing the goods of the
community, belongs to none but those who exercise authority over those
goods; and yet distributive justice is also in the subjects to whom
those goods are distributed in so far as they are contented by a just
distribution. Moreover distribution of common goods is sometimes made
not to the state but to the members of a family, and such distribution
can be made by authority of a private individual.
Reply to Objection 4: Movement takes its species from the term
"whereunto." Hence it belongs to legal justice to direct to the
common good those matters which concern private individuals: whereas on
the contrary it belongs to particular justice to direct the common good
to particular individuals by way of distribution.
Reply to Objection 5: Distributive and commutative justice differ
not only in respect of unity and multitude, but also in respect of
different kinds of due: because common property is due to an individual
in one way, and his personal property in another way.
|
|