The Difference Principle

764 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Principles of justice according to rawls scholars essays

The Difference Principle

Every citizen aspires to obtain a just society in which to live. Some political philosophers hold differing opinions as how to reach this just society. One of the more widely accepted approaches is John Rawl's Difference Principle.

To achieve a just society, Rawls believes in two principles. The first principle states that each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. The second principle is that social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a)reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and b) attached to positions and offices open to all (Rawls, 60).

Within Rawls' second principle of justice lies the difference principle or the maximin rule. In accordance with this principle, all income and wealth is to be distributed equally unless the unequal distribution is to everyone's advantage. Rawls holds the ideal political theory. I believe that this is in fact the best principle in which we should live. When viewing justice as fairness, this outcome will be the most favorable for all parties involved. In this society everyone benefits, so even if there are slight inequalities, the end result will come out better than if there was complete equality.

So for this to work, then even the least advantaged must profit from the inequalities. If anyone were hurt by these uneven wages, the principle would be found unjust.

As an example, we can view a society running its economy in one of three ways. The first way would be with completely equal distribution of income. Everyone would receive $10,000 dollars a year. Since no one earns more or less than anyone else, we could view this as on...

... middle of paper ...

...seems as though one man would be making a profit at the others expense. But Rawls comes back to believe that although this is bad, it is the lazy person's choice to be lazy that is the factor of justice.

I strongly believe that John Rawls' Difference Principle is a sound theory. I would agree with practically any situation where all parties benefit without the downfall or disadvantage of its participants. I see only good coming from this theory. In the equally distributive society, although continuing to maintain a sense of justice, it lacks in that it is more difficult for its people create savings and economic growth. Therefore, no one is really capable of gaining wealth. At least Rawls' Difference Principle gives citizens a chance to gain wealth and a better lifestyle. Any system that promotes a better standard of living is the better one in my book.

Show More
Related

  • John Rawls On Justice Analysis

    1184 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the aforementioned passage from her document “John Rawls on Justice” Ada Maria Isasi-Diaz’s sheds light on the major flaw in John’s Rawls’s “social contract theory” for establishing “Justice” in our society. She asserts

    Read More

  • Nami Arora What Do We Deserve Summary

    1198 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, as Arora notes, “in practice, people don’t have real equality of opportunity due to various disadvantages.” (87) In America, the richest socioeconomic income group owns a staggering 84 % of the nation’s wealth. (91) Moreover, “a kid from the poorest fifth of all households has a 1 percent chance of reaching the top 5 percentile income bracket, while a kid from the richest fifth has a 22 percent chance.” (91) Clearly, this is not a feasible model. Comparatively, the egalitarian model Arora discusses—while far more equitable and utilitarian—undermines the moral deserts of achievement that are quintessential to the very fabric of our nation. Therefore, I find a mixture between the libertarian and meritocratic approach to be the most just. Not only does the model account for person achievement, but also places a premium on equality of

    Read More

  • What are the Causes of Inequality?

    2446 Words  | 5 Pages

    In the treatise named “Leviathan” published in 1651, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) proposed an early variant of equality among men that inequality did not exist in natural condition, meaning everyone is born equal; however, inequality's existence was the result of civil laws (Hobbes & Gaskin, 1998). In this sense, inequality is generally referred to social inequality which is characterized by the existence of unequal opportunities and rewards for different social positions or statuses within a group or society; plus, this negative social phenomenon contains structured and recurrent patterns of unequal distributions of goods, wealth, opportunities, rewards, and punishments (Crossman, 2012).

    Read More

  • The Fairest Of Them All By John Rawls Analysis

    663 Words  | 2 Pages

    Another key component of Rawls two principles of justice is the second part of the second principle, which is known as the difference principle “as a principle of distributive justice in the narrow sense” (61). The difference principle is meant to give the most advantage to the least advantaged group in society by providing “fair and equal opportunity” (61).

    Read More

  • John Rawls on Justice

    1425 Words  | 3 Pages

    John Rawls divided up his theory into four distinct parts; the first part consisted of his belief of primary goods, next is the formation of principles of justice, third is the institutionalization of society, and finally the last part of his theory is the actual workings within society . The general concept of Rawls’s theory is, “all primary goods must be distributed equally unless the unequal distribution of any of these goods is to the advantage of the least favored” . In order to analyze this correctly Rawls’ terms must be defined; according to Rawls a primary good are “things that every rational man is presumed to want. Goods normally have use regardless of a person’s rational plan to life is” . Some examples of a primary good are: basic rights, opportunity, and income to name a few. With the unders...

    Read More

  • Rawls Principles Of Justice Essay

    1396 Words  | 3 Pages

    Justice is seen as a concept that is balanced between law and morality. The laws that support social harmony are considered just. Rawls states that justice is the first virtue of social institutions; this means that a good society is one structured according to principles of justice. The significance of principles of justice is to provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of the society and defining the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens of the society. According to Rawls, justice is best understood by a grasp of the principles of justice (Rawls, 1971). The principles are expected to represent the moral basis of political government. These principles indicate that humankind needs liberty and freedom so long as they do harm others. Rawls states that justice is significant to human development and prosperity.

    Read More

  • Rawls Theory Of Justice

    3346 Words  | 7 Pages

    I have read the Theory of Justice and I have found it wanting in both scope and realism. The difference principle proposed by Rawls, his second principle, is the focus of my critique. While this paper will not focus solely on the second principle, all analysis done within this essay are all targeted towards the scope of influence that Rawls treats the second principle with. Why is it that a person has to offset his initial gain for the betterment of others? Rawls proposes this idea as the criterion for his second principle, the difference principle.

    Read More

  • John Rawls: “Original Position”

    1126 Words  | 3 Pages

    Out of this experiment Rawls provides us with two basic principles of rules of: 1) every person should have equal opportunity to access a justice system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all and; 2) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both; a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged offices and b) positions opportunities should be made available to all under fair and equality conditions (242).... ... middle of paper ... ... I would opt against some other economic society, not knowing whether or not it would satisfy the conditions of providing the best opportunity for the least in my society.

    Read More

  • To Kill A Mockingbird Social Inequality

    1035 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many who have disagreed about the huge effect of the growing socioeconomic inequality and/or income inequality, have argued with the suggestion that this inequality can benefit today’s world. Tejvan Pettinger, an economics teacher, argues, “If someone works harder and as a consequence receives a higher wage then this is not market failure.” He suggests that by rewarding hard workers there will be a “boost of productivity” which then he goes on will “lead to a higher output.” Another argument is if workers can get extra income, that it can ’trickle down’ to others. An example of this is if an entrepreneur sets up a business he may become a millionaire, but also will create jobs and provide income for other workers.

    Read More

  • Theory Of Justice In John Rawls's Theory Of Justice

    2303 Words  | 5 Pages

    Since this principle aims to benefit the people who are in the worst off position, this creates a sense of equality, wherein the person who has the least, gets the most compensation, and in turn, the person with the most, receives the least; thus it balances out the inequality of income and wealth. This constant shift in balance will provide society with a way of moving forward, as people are able to shift up and down in ranks, and allow the entire community to grow in some way. The economic standing will always fluctuate depending on conditions, but the distribution of principles will remain

    Read More

  • John Rawls And Utilitarianism

    2028 Words  | 5 Pages

    The social contract theory of John Rawls challenges utilitarianism by pointing out the impracticality of the theory. Mainly, in a society of utilitarians, a citizens rights could be completely ignored if injustice to this one citizen would benefit the rest of society. Rawls believes that a social contract theory, similar those proposed by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, would be a more logical solution to the question of fairness in any government. Social contract theory in general and including the views of Rawls, is such that in a situation where a society is established of people who are self interested, rational, and equal, the rules of justice are established by what is mutually acceptable and agreed upon by all the people therein. This scenario of negotiating the laws of that society that will be commonly agreed upon and beneficial to all is what Rawls terms "The Original Position and Justification".

    Read More

  • John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

    959 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.

    Read More

  • Distributive Justice By Robert Nozick And John Rawls

    1255 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...e achieved when the Liberty and Difference Principle are enacted with the veil of ignorance. On the contrary, Nozick argues that Rawls’s theory is exactly the sort of patterned principle that infringes upon individual liberty. As an alternative, Nozick provides his unpatterned principle as the ideal distribution of goods in a society. To me, Rawls’s argues his theory in a manner where his principles of justice are not only difficult to achieve, but ultimately are exceedingly deficient in providing general utility. The veil of ignorance has proved to be almost impossible as well as unethical. The Difference Principle in itself is unable to justly distribute property since it clearly violates an individual’s liberty. Since Rawls’s method of distributive justice is rendered unreasonable and inefficient, it leaves us with a clear answer derived from two disjunctions.

    Read More

  • The Original Position and the Veil of Ignorance

    1361 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rawls’ primary goal in designing the original position is to describe a situation that he believes would achieve the most extensive liberty and fairness possible to all the parties involved in his hypothetical social contract (Rawls, 1971). Rawls believes that in order to achieve this level of fairness, it must be assumed that the parties involved are situated behind a ‘veil of ignorance’ (Rawls, 1971). This veil of ignorance deprives all of the parties of all knowledge of arbitrary facts about themselves, about other citizens, from influencing the agreement among the representatives (Rawls, 1971). For example, “no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status; nor does he know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence and strength, and the like.” (Rawls, 1971, 137) Rawls argues that if rational people found themselves in this position, they would al...

    Read More

  • Advantages And Disadvantages Of The American Dream

    914 Words  | 2 Pages

    Money is an essential part of life where every people can satisfy whatever they need and every person in America has a chance to find a job. However, some of the people in the country wanted to go on with their life freely by being a part of a welfare. Furthermore, distribution of wealth is a huge demand of every citizen. Everyone today is trying to look down for every people in the lower class, as they did not give any benefit to the country, waiting for the benefits that they will receive from the government. For instance, when most lower class people have gone through a financial crisis due to overspending, insufficient fund or pay for their work to support themselves and/or their family. The example shows that lower class people made the economy of the country unstable, however, the middle class and the higher class is at fault as well. Furthermore, even though the benefit of that the lower class received is from the middle class, the middle class as well benefits from the higher class. To sum up, every class is at fault towards giving the country’s economy a positive

    Read More

More about The Difference Principle

Open Document