在这一集中，约翰和肯思考全球正义的概念。这个世界充满了暴行和严重的贫困。这是正义的问题吗?我们应该做些什么来确保国际社会的需求得到满足?军事干预作为防止种族灭绝的一种方法什么时候是正当的?那歧视女性的文化习俗呢?

Helen Stacy, a special guest from Stanford Law School joins the show to help John and Ken navigate through these treacherous waters. Stacy originally practiced law, but eventually became fascinated with the question of why our law courts are ultimately incapable of preventing crimes. Even though the international community is nominally opposed to genocides, unsanitary drinking water, and countless other such tragedies, we do remarkably little to prevent or stop them from occurring.
But then again, asks Ken, are all local tragedies to be treated as injustices? Given that they are evils which can be stopped and result from economic inequities, Stacy seems convinced that they should. Moreover, there line between global and local issues is hazy at best, and local issues can easily become relevant internationally. For instance, the practice of genital mutilation—a common practice in nations like Ethiopia, was brought into the United States, where it is not only taboo but can be criminal.

How much work should be done to make sure that international institutions are capable of dealing with these ethical transgressions? What should be done, and where? Some look back on our long history of violence turmoil and feel pessimistic about the feasibility of serious reforms towards remedying global injustices. Philosophers have only been thinking about justice in global terms for twenty or thirty years, so how much legitimacy does this approach really have?

On the other hand, as Stacy points out, it seems like our awareness of global problems will only increase through new media and news coverage. Not only is our awareness of global justice here to stay, but it will probably grow with time. Still there are some complications. For instance, how can you seriously think about issues like prevention of problems if you never actually see them happen? Nevertheless, it seems like progress is a real goal, and will come closer as global sympathy and democratization rise. Let’s hope so.

• Roving Philosophical Report波莉·斯崔克采访法希姆，他是前南斯拉夫铁托政权倒台后种族清洗的幸存者。他和他的妻子被送往集中营，在那里他们经历了难以形容的暴行，有时看到数百人在一个晚上被杀。最终，他被驱逐出境，逃到了安全的地方。尽管如此，他仍然等待着看到种族清洗背后的领导人被绳之以法。由于国际刑事法庭没有判处他死刑，他被迫看着那些曾经折磨过他的人以比他认为的更轻的惩罚离开。

• Philosophy Talk Goes to the Movies(seek to 45: 40): John and Ken discuss one of the finest movies to ever ask questions about global justice: Hotel Rwanda. This film does for the Rwandan genocide what Schindler’s List did for the Holocaust, and brings a morally nuanced perspective to its portrayal of the situation.