The Quest for Cosmic Justice by Thomas Sowell

Misfortune is not injustice.

Yet, nowadays, the benevolent human emotion to help the less fortunate has led to a confusion of language in which “injustice” is becoming synonymous with “misfortune”. Calling something an “injustice”—unlike calling some thing a “misfortune”—suggests that societal remedial action is mandatory. This confusion would be merely annoying if it did not breed support for public policies that exacerbate rather than ameliorate problems. Pinpointing and explaining these unfortunate consequences of public policies is among Sowell’s chief talents.

After I have read Michael J. Sandel’s Justice, as usual, I will have to jump to the other side of the political spectrum and read Sowell’s work. This is the fourth Sowell book I have reviewed. Even though a lot of the arguments in this book felt familiar, I continually find something more to learn. The Quest for Cosmic Justice is an exploration of the concept of cosmic justice and its implications for our society. Drawing upon his expertise as an economist and social theorist, Sowell presents a nuanced critique of the pursuit of an idealized notion of social justice.

Sowell define cosmic justice as the relief of all misfortune, including equalizing nature, aiming to create equality of outcomes. It is the broadest concept of justice going. The narrower, and in Sowell’s view, the correct concept of justice is the traditional one—justice defined according to the fairness of the process. If the process is unbiased and if all parties abide by the agreed-on rules, then justice prevails.

“A society that puts equality – in the sense of equality of outcomes – ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom. The use of force to achieve equality will destroy freedom, and the force, introduced for good purposes, will end up in the hands of people who use it to promote their own interests.” said Milton Friedman. Whatever the validity of this argument— and one need only think of the horrors of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot to realize that painful possibilities are not mere fantasies.

Sowell discusses two very different conceptions of justice in this book. The traditional conception is that the rules or standards are known to all participants and applied equally. Rewards and punishments are doled out based on these widely known, equally applicable rules. Sowell argues that this is the conception known to the founding fathers and the one that works best in practice. The amount of knowledge required to implement this form of justice is manageable—one need only know the rules and whether these rules have been violated in a given situation. This consistent principle allows people to behave and plan with reasonable certainty, which leads to economic growth and relative societal harmony.

Cosmic justice, on the other hand, is the idea that humans should be judged based on all factors that impact their lives, including the circumstances, misfortunes, and events over which they had no control. This latter conception of justice is part of what is meant by "social justice" and seeks to take into account literally everything; it seeks to equalize nature, which is inherently unequal.

Here's a an example: I am born conventionally ugly, that is a misfortune. I did not choose to be born conventionally ugly, and physical appearance certainly plays a big role in real life interactions. There are and will be negative consequences with being ugly. However, is this misfortune an injustice that needs to be fixed? Can I hereby demand to be subsidized for the losses I experience due to my ugliness? Or demand others to only allow to find me beautiful? Sounds pretty ridiculous eh? Yet if you pay attention to some of the social justice campaigns there are quite a few agenda to demand others to see them as “beautiful”. Not going to name any specific movements here to attract hate and derail from the review…

There are several other examples of cosmic justice in the book. For example, when a man named Richard Allen Davis in 1996 brutally murdered a 12 year old girl named Polly Klaas, his difficult childhood was brought into consideration even though the victim, the girl, did not cause his past difficulties. Only cosmic justice would consider Davis's past relevant. Another illustration will  be those born with physical or mental handicaps obviously did not choose these disabilities. But, in the quest for cosmic justice, some attempt to force others to hire these disabled people no matter what additional costs must be borne by the employer. The law requires "reasonable" accommodations, but the employer is better positioned than anyone to know the costs of their business. Cosmic justice is much more difficult for humans to sift through and tally. Sowell is correct when he argues that it is beyond the capabilities of humans to know or implement cosmic justice. Those who advocate it do so out of a sense of self-righteous moral superiority. They never consider the additional costs that others must bear, the perverse incentives it creates, the uncertainty it generates, and the trampling of some people’s freedoms that invariably ensues.

One of the book’s notable strengths lies in Sowell’s meticulous examination of the unintended consequences and trade-offs associated with the pursuit of cosmic justice. He adeptly illustrates how well-intentioned policies aimed at achieving perfect social justice can lead to undesirable outcomes. By considering historical examples and empirical evidence, Sowell argues convincingly that such policies often undermine individual freedom, personal responsibility, and economic efficiency.

Central to Sowell's argument is his emphasis on the importance of traditional justice systems. He advocates for the preservation of individual liberty, arguing that cosmic justice often necessitates government intervention that encroaches upon personal freedoms and curtails individual agency. He highlights the role of voluntary interactions and free markets in fostering economic prosperity and social harmony, challenging the notion that government-imposed redistributive measures can effectively address societal inequalities. Furthermore, Sowell underscores the significance of the rule of law and equal treatment under it. He warns against policies that prioritize group-based outcomes over impartiality and the consistent application of laws. By doing so, he highlights the potential risks of perpetuating inequality, favoritism, and social divisions.

In his exploration of cosmic justice, Sowell acknowledges the inherent limitations of human knowledge and the complexity of social systems. He encourages readers to recognize the uncertainty and unintended consequences that accompany attempts to engineer an ideal society. By emphasizing the importance of humility and the acknowledgment of these limitations, Sowell provides a compelling argument for approaching social justice issues with caution and a deeper appreciation for the complexities involved.

While Sowell's perspective leans toward a conservative worldview, the book invites readers from various ideological backgrounds to engage in critical reflection. It challenges conventional wisdom, encouraging readers to question assumptions and consider the long-term effects of policy decisions. Sowell's rigorous analysis, supported by extensive research and historical insights, contributes to a richer and more nuanced understanding of social justice issues. This book is not without its detractors, I personally did notice some conservative leaning biases in his analysis. However, I believe even readers who may disagree with his conclusions can appreciate the intellectual rigor and the breadth of topics covered in the book.