Towards compassionate justice: recognition, invisibilization, and the institutions of justice
This article argues that the persistence of unreported injustices in liberal democracies stems from "institutional invisibility"—a failure of recognition that can be overcome by integrating the Ethics of Care, Martha Nussbaum's account of compassion, and Axel Honneth's critical theory to cultivate compassion as a virtue at both individual and institutional levels, as illustrated by the contemporary crisis of migration.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Imagine a society where the rules are written clearly, the courts are open to everyone, and the procedures for filing a complaint are fair and efficient. On paper, this system works perfectly. Yet, in reality, many people still suffer unfair treatment without ever realizing it, or they suffer in silence because they feel they have no voice. This is not a failure of the law itself, but a failure of the people and institutions to truly see the human beings standing before them. This is the central puzzle tackled by a new analysis of how justice systems operate, drawing on ideas about how we care for one another and how we recognize each other as human. The work brings together three distinct ways of thinking: the "ethics of care," which focuses on relationships and meeting needs rather than just abstract rules; the idea of "recognition," which suggests that being treated with dignity is a fundamental human need; and the concept of "compassion," not just as a fleeting feeling, but as a skill that can be learned and built into our laws. The authors argue that when institutions ignore the vulnerability of people—such as migrants, the elderly, or the disabled—they create a form of invisibility that no amount of legal procedure can fix.
The researchers, Cecilia Coronado and Montserrat Salomón, propose that the solution lies in transforming how justice is practiced. They suggest that formal fairness is not enough. Even when a judge follows every rule correctly, a person can still be treated as if they do not matter. This happens when institutions fail to recognize the specific needs of vulnerable groups, effectively rendering them invisible. To understand why this matters, the authors look at the work of philosopher Martha Nussbaum, who reminds us that human beings are not just rational thinkers but also physical creatures who need care. We are all born dependent, we fall ill, we age, and we rely on others. A just society, they argue, must acknowledge this reality rather than pretending everyone is independent and self-sufficient. When laws ignore this interdependence, they leave behind those who need help the most.
The paper suggests that the missing ingredient to fix this gap is compassion, but not in the soft, sentimental sense. Instead, the authors describe compassion as a disciplined virtue that can be taught and institutionalized. They break down this emotion into three clear steps that a person or an institution must take to truly care for another. First, one must recognize that a situation is serious and threatens a person's ability to live a good life. Second, one must understand that the suffering is not the person's own fault; it is undeserved. Third, and perhaps most importantly, one must realize that the other person's well-being is connected to one's own. This last step breaks down the idea that we are separate, isolated individuals. It creates a bridge where the pain of a stranger feels like a concern for oneself. The authors argue that if we can cultivate this way of thinking, it changes how we design our schools, our laws, and our public policies.
To test their ideas, the authors look at the real-world example of migration, a situation where these failures of recognition are starkly visible. They point out that migrants often face a triple denial. First, in the sphere of care, they are treated as administrative problems to be managed rather than vulnerable humans to be protected. The authors cite a tragic fire at a migration facility in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, in 2023, where forty migrants died locked behind doors they could not open. This was not just a bureaucratic error; it was a failure to see the people inside as human beings deserving of safety. Second, in the sphere of rights, migrants with irregular status are often denied the legal standing to speak for themselves or demand justice. Third, in the sphere of solidarity, public narratives often portray them as threats or burdens rather than as neighbors and contributors. In this environment, migrants may stop expecting to be treated fairly, a psychological state where they adapt to their own invisibility because they have learned that no one is listening.
The paper also addresses a common worry: that relying on compassion might make justice too emotional or unpredictable. Some critics argue that politics should be based on cold reason, not feelings. The authors counter this by insisting that compassion should not replace the law, but rather work through it. They argue that compassion, when built into the structure of institutions, acts as a guide that ensures laws are applied with humanity. It is not about a judge acting on a sudden whim, but about a system designed to recognize vulnerability as a normal part of the human condition. Just as a building needs a foundation to stand, a legal system needs the emotional capacity to care for its citizens to function truly justly.
Ultimately, the study concludes that a truly fair society requires a two-way street. It is not enough for citizens to be kind; the institutions themselves must be designed to be compassionate. Laws must protect the vulnerable not as an afterthought, but as a primary goal. By integrating the ethics of care into the machinery of justice, society can move beyond a system that only works for the strong and independent. Instead, it can build a framework that acknowledges our shared fragility, ensuring that no one is left invisible in the shadows of a system that claims to be fair. The path forward, the authors suggest, is to treat compassion not as a weakness, but as a necessary strength for any society that wishes to call itself just.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.