“Equity,” a fertile concept for understanding justice in More's time, has its origins in Greek and Roman philosophy. As the putative emissary of Greek (and Ciceronian) philosophy in More's Utopia, it is thus fitting that Raphael Hythloday expressly acknowledges classical sources in his references to equity, such as in his allusion to the “leaden rule” of Aristotle and his paraphrase of Cicero's famous epigram, “summum ius, summa iniuria.” In substance, however, Raphael's understanding of equity differs from that of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. For example, while classical thinkers sought flexibility in the application of written law so as to accord with a higher justice (as in the “leaden rule”), Raphael rejects such impure flexibility. Also, Utopia, itself, a land with few laws and fewer lawyers, lacks equity as it was traditionally understood—that is, as a justice-facilitating corrective to the imprecision of written law. Nevertheless, Raphael emotionally concludes Book Two by apparently praising the “fairness” (aequitas) of Utopia. Despite his appeals to equity, Raphael actually appears to be an inequitable man in the action of the dialogue, with his brash monologues, tendentious citations of the Gospel, and dubious references to equity, itself. By contrast, Cardinal Morton and Morus embody the traits of the “equitable man,” a figure with a key role in promoting justice in Aristotle's Ethics and Rhetoric and in bringing about the best regime in Plato's Laws and Republic. This irony in Utopia helps readers appreciate the fruits and risks of incorporating philosophy into politics, especially as it relates to clamoring for reform. We see the important distinction between impassioned partisans of philosophy (such as Raphael) and the enlightened gentleness of men like Morton and Morus.
Understanding responsibility in Responsible AI. Dianoetic virtues and the hard problem of context