Diversity and Social Justice

This chapter studies the evolution of the psychological concept of injustice, for which there is broad agreement, in contrast to individual ideas about what is fair and unfair, which differ greatly across time and societies. Charles Darwin argued that people have an innate sense of what “ought” to be, an idea that the psychologist Fritz Heider expanded on. Heider defined the sense of ought as beliefs about the “requiredness” of acting in a particular way. Requiredness to act, posits Heider, is rooted in the gap or incompleteness or injustice of a situation. Bringing about needed closure, then, is tantamount to the just and right. Heider’s ideas relate to Leon Festinger’s more recent concept of “cognitive dissonance,” which suggests that individuals feel tension or discord when grappling with two incongruent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes. The chapter then considers the conundrum that arises in instances when the human drive for fairness and justice cannot be rebalanced. For instance, neither the law nor individual attempts to restore justice could successfully redress the injustices of slavery and the Holocaust. In fact, research shows a neural foundation for the need for revenge and retribution. Injustice, then, becomes an intergenerational matter when injustices are not rebalanced between people. They simply extend to their descendants after the original people involved die.