ABSTRACT
Arguing for justice is arguing for principles and practices that are to be justified on the basis of disinterested or impartial considerations. Indeed, if it is, it could have no claim to being a scientific account of social reality. There is one very short way dissenters developed by G. A. Cohen in explicit criticism of Marxist immoralism. Most people in most societies do not have such an awareness. From the perspective of a communist society of the future, capitalism is unjust, where it is possible for a higher form of society to replace it. Extreme historicists and conceptual relativists, not Karl Marx, are those who come up with theses of conceptual imprisonment, with the belief that all perspectives are equally adequate, or at least with the somewhat weaker belief that the people can have no good reasons for thinking one perspective is more adequate than another.
