'Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?' a witty road map for negotiating modern moral dilemmas

"Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?"

by Michael J. Sandel

Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 308 pp., $25

Imagine that you are the driver of an out-of-control trolley hurtling at 60 miles per hour down the tracks toward a group of five workers who cannot get out of the way. You notice a side track onto which you can divert the trolley, which would save the lives of those standing on the tracks.

Unfortunately, though, if diverted onto the side track, the trolley will just as certainly kill a lone worker standing on the sidetracks and he will die solely on account of your actions. Should you turn the trolley? Is that a moral choice even though it certainly means that, through your actions, you will have directly caused the death of the individual on the side track?

What if the situation was slightly different? What if instead of turning the trolley, you could save the group of five, but only by pushing an extraordinarily overweight individual off a bridge and into the path of the trolley to stop it. Still moral to act?

Harvard Professor Michael Sandel explores these famous "trolley problems" and a vast catalog of similar moral dilemmas in his new book, "Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do?" Sandel, whose moral-philosophy course is one of the most popular undergraduate courses at Harvard, is a master at using modern-day news to highlight different approaches to justice.

Using examples drawn from recent experience, Sandel explores a variety of approaches to theories of justice. Sandel reviews the cold calculation of Jeremy Bentham's utilitarianism (which asks which course of action will lead to the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people), to John Stuart Mill's more humane but more abstract approach to utilitarianism, with examples ranging from throwing Christians to the lions in Rome (hard on the Christian but served as entertainment for thousands and so arguably justifiable to utilitarians) to exploring the morality of torture in ticking-bomb scenarios (our former vice president will find this discussion of particular interest).

From the sale of kidneys to surrogate mothers, the problems flow from his pen like a numbing catalog of trouble. Taking this justice stuff seriously is hard work with tough choices: Best to trade that latte for a stiff drink if you are working your way through this curriculum.

Sandel explores the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant (who explored the concept of duty as defining morality), John Rawls (who argued for a system of morality flowing from equality), and even Aristotle.

But the ultimate aim here, appropriate to any college survey course, is to leave the reader with a range of different perspectives through which to view the world and the moral choices that we make.

Sandel is at his best in weaving modern-day problems into convincing applications of competing theories of justice. He loses his footing, though, when he detours into the jargon of moral philosophy, at times testing a reader's patience (at least those not compelled to take notes or face end-of-semester consequences).

But he concludes with a flourish: "A just society can't be achieved simply by maximizing utility or by securing freedom of choice. To achieve a just society we have to reason together about the meaning of the good life, and to create a public culture hospitable to disagreements that will inevitably arise." Quoting Robert F. Kennedy and President Obama, he argues that this approach to moral philosophy can and should have a real impact on our common good.

For those seeking a short course through moral philosophy from a witty writer, fast on his feet, and nimble with his pen, this thin volume is difficult to beat.

Still, in the meantime, best to stay off the trolley tracks entirely.

Kevin J. Hamilton is a Seattle lawyer.