A Theory of Justice

A Theory of Justice

Communitarian critics of Rawls have argued that his A Theory of Justice provides an inadequate account of individuals in the original position. Michael Sandel, in Liberalism and the Limits of Justice argues that Rawls' conception of the person divorces any constitutive attachments that persons might have to their ends. Hence, Sandel asserts that Rawls privileges the standpoint of self-interested individuals at the expense of communal interests. I do not find Sandel's specific criticisms to be an accurate critique of what Rawls is doing in A Theory of Justice. However, this does not mean the more general thrust of the communitarian analysis of Rawls' conception of the person must be abandoned. By picking up the pieces of Sandel's critique, I contend that Rawls indeed divorces certain constitutive characteristics (and not ends as Sandel argues) of individuals from their identity in the original position - characteristics that are crucial to an effective conception of justice. Certain constitutive characteristics of individuals have a socially relevant meaning, such as race and gender, and by divorcing the knowledge of the meaning of these characteristics in society, Rawls' theory of justice cannot adequately account for injustices that arise from the social meaning of these characteristics. Thus, by neglecting relevant social meanings pertinent to our particular community, the theory of justice advanced by Rawls remains ineffective in dealing with racial and gender discrimination.

Introduction

There are many different ways to approach constructing a theory of justice. One way is to begin from a hypothetical starting point which is not subject to the murky contingencies of particular societies. This is ...

... middle of paper ...

...se any metaphysical commitments about the asocial or individualistic status of persons in the original position, it does neglect certain vital characteristics crucial for deciding on principles of justice appropriate for a certain society. I think that it is at this point that a communitarian critique proves more effective. Sandel's point "that I can never fully be constituted by my attributes, that there must always be some attributes I have rather than I am" can be reasserted here if attributes are taken to mean characteristics of persons that have significant social meanings, such as race and gender. Rawls constructs his theory as an ideal, general enough to apply to various societies. But, what his original parties neglect in the original position has potentially damaging consequences in the inadequacy of the principles chosen to correct for certain injustices.