"Think how different human societies would be if they were based on love rather than justice. But no such societies have ever existed on earth"
About this Quote
Adler contrasts two organizing principles for human community: love and justice. Love points to gratuitous care, mercy, and self-giving that exceed what is owed. Justice sets the floor of what each person may rightly demand from another and from institutions. He asks us to imagine how radiant public life would be if the norm were generosity rather than entitlement. Then he anchors the dream with a sober claim: no society has been built on love alone.
That realism reflects both moral psychology and political experience. Love is personal, voluntary, and often partial; it flourishes in families and friendships. Justice is impersonal, enforceable, and public; it governs strangers. Laws and courts can measure obligations and arbitrate conflicts, but they cannot compel the free interior act that love requires. Scale intensifies the problem. As communities grow and scarcity bites, we need rules that do not presuppose virtue. Attempts to legislate fraternity or abolish property in the name of universal love have historically turned coercive, because affection cannot be decreed and trust cannot be mass-produced.
Adler, an Aristotelian-Thomist, ranks charity higher than justice as a virtue, yet assigns justice the foundational role in political order. Augustine and Aquinas loom in the background: the earthly city is organized by right and law; the heavenly city by perfect love. On earth, the best hope is not to replace justice with love but to animate justice with love. Justice tells us what we owe; love invites us to give more. Institutions must secure rights impartially, while citizens, moved by love, practice mercy, forgiveness, and solidarity that no statute can demand.
The provocation is double-edged. Do not idolize law, because a merely just society can be cold and brittle. Do not romanticize love as a social blueprint, because without justice it becomes favoritism or fantasy. Build firm frameworks of justice, and leave generous spaces where love can do what law cannot.
That realism reflects both moral psychology and political experience. Love is personal, voluntary, and often partial; it flourishes in families and friendships. Justice is impersonal, enforceable, and public; it governs strangers. Laws and courts can measure obligations and arbitrate conflicts, but they cannot compel the free interior act that love requires. Scale intensifies the problem. As communities grow and scarcity bites, we need rules that do not presuppose virtue. Attempts to legislate fraternity or abolish property in the name of universal love have historically turned coercive, because affection cannot be decreed and trust cannot be mass-produced.
Adler, an Aristotelian-Thomist, ranks charity higher than justice as a virtue, yet assigns justice the foundational role in political order. Augustine and Aquinas loom in the background: the earthly city is organized by right and law; the heavenly city by perfect love. On earth, the best hope is not to replace justice with love but to animate justice with love. Justice tells us what we owe; love invites us to give more. Institutions must secure rights impartially, while citizens, moved by love, practice mercy, forgiveness, and solidarity that no statute can demand.
The provocation is double-edged. Do not idolize law, because a merely just society can be cold and brittle. Do not romanticize love as a social blueprint, because without justice it becomes favoritism or fantasy. Build firm frameworks of justice, and leave generous spaces where love can do what law cannot.
Quote Details
| Topic | Justice |
|---|
More Quotes by Mortimer
Add to List
