Though the revised edition of A Theory of Justice, published in 1999, is the definitive statement of Rawls's view, so much of the extensive literature on Rawls's theory refers to the first edition.

This book discusses problems of conceptual analysis as well as normative issues of vital contemporary concern.

Feinberg is one of the leading philosophers of law of the last forty years. This volume collects recent articles, both published and unpublished, on what he terms "basic questions" about the law, particularly in regard to the relationship to morality. Accessibly and elegantly written, this volume's audience will reflect the diverse nature of Feinberg's own interests: scholars in philosophy of law, legal theory, and ethical and moral theory.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is commonly viewed as a safety net for individual athletes, for universities, and for inter-collegiate sports programs. They help reduce injury to athletes, they participate in the marketing of athletic events, and they continue to change the rules of college sport to make it more fun for the spectators. There is another view that argues the NCAA is a buyers' cartel or monopsonist that engages in price-fixing for colleges and universities. The prices they fix (...) are the wages of student athletes and they accomplish this through regulations that prohibit the athlete from receiving any income other than in-kind scholarship payments. Students who receive other kinds of scholarships are not subject to these same restrictions. For example, students who receive scholarships in music can and do augment their income by performing for pay. It is the opinion of some that these price fixing scholarship agreements limiting the income of student athletes discriminates against a whole class of scholarship recipients. They also believe that this kind of behavior on the part of colleges and universities that make up the membership of the NCAA is highly unethical and may even be illegal. (shrink)

This first volume in the four-volume series The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law focuses on the "harm principle," the commonsense view that prevention of harm to persons other than the perpetrator is a legitimate purpose of criminal legislation. Feinberg presents a detailed analysis of the concept and definition of harm and applies it to a host of practical and theoretical issues, showing how the harm principle must be interpreted if it is to be a plausible guide to the lawmaker.