Response to Aristotle's theory of social justice

1. According to Aristotle, when people argue about justice, they usually are "speaking of a limited and partial justice," which means that the people who are talking about justice don't have comprehensive understanding about justice themselves. Justice is a concept applied to both people and things. It is easier for people to judge things from the point of view of an outsider, while it is pretty hard to judge justice between people, because in this way the judgement is subject instead of absolute object.However, it is even harder for people to be aware of their incorrect judgement, because they imagine themselves to be correct. 2.In Aristotle's example, if people in one group are unequal in wealth, they would think themselves unequal from all aspects. If people in another group are equal  In free birth, instead, they would consider themselves in a society where everything is distributed equally. 3.Because it is nearly impossible for people to notice justice objectively in every field of life. On one hand, people easily focus more on the aspects they care. For example, the disabled seek justice more in social welfare while the rich seek more justice in the solid protection of personal property. On the other hand, people in different social classes have different opinions. When justice is discussed in a larger sense, more elements just as   wealth and free birth should be taken into consideration. So the situation will get more and more complicated. But when justice is thought about in a specific case, the number of variable is limited to few. The situation then becomes simpler. 4.As Aristotle points out in "A Definition of Justice," "political society exists for the sake of noble actions, and not of mere companionship. Hence they who contribute most to such a society have a greater share in it than those who have the same or a greater freedom or nobility of birth but are inferior to them in political virtue; or than those who exceed them in wealth but are surpassed by them in virtue." In this case, the mass may consider the extra tax on the rich a kind of justice while the minority of wealthy people must take it as injustice. The conflict is caused by different social classes between the two sides. Whether the tax is justice or not shouldn't be simply answered "yes" or "no" according to personal will. It should depend on whether a wealthy person contributes more to the society in virtue sense. If he or she does, then he or she deserves the possession and shouldn't pay extra tax only because of more possession.