The main hypothesis of Lerner's (1978) "just-world" theory is that people are inclined to think that their physical and social environment is just and that individuals generally get what they deserve and deserve what they get. Contrary to Lerner's assumption, however, this paper suggests that in some situations, people may perceive the world as unjust, because such a belief has a specific "ego-defensive" component for an individual. A view of the world as unjust can be used to justify failure, bolster low self-esteem, and avoid challenging situations. It is likely that the belief in an unjust world, although in itself a legitimate block to success, may be aggravated in conditions diagnostic for competence and hence can be used as a special form of self-handicapping strategy. This assumption was tested in a two (low versus high tendency to engage in self-handicapping behaviors) by two (low versus high opportunity to use the belief in an unjust world as a self-handicapping strategy) experiment. Study findings imply that perceiving the world as unjust may be a self-handicapping strategy. The findings are consistent with studies that show people may use various handicaps and disadvantages, such as test anxiety symptoms, social anxiety symptoms, or obesity, to protect their self- esteem. Thus, the belief in an unjust world is entirely defensive, in that it allows a person to avoid activity, provided there is a choice that leaves the person with high self-esteem. 1 table, appended Belief in a Just Academic World Scale, and 25 references