A Theory of Justice Presented by John Rawls

1569 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Inequalities of the justice system

In A Theory of Justice John Rawls presents his argument for justice and inequality. Rawls theorizes that in the original position, a hypothetical state where people reason without bias, they would agree to live in a society based on two principles of justice (Rawls 1971, 4). These two principles of justice are named the first and second principles. The first is the equal rights and liberties principle. The second is a combination of the difference principle and the fair equality of opportunity principle, or FEOP (Rawls 1971, 53). Rawls argues that inequality will always be inevitable in any society (Rawls 1971, 7). For example, there will always be a varied distribution of social and economic advantages. Some people will be wealthier than others and some will hold places of greater importance in society. Rawls’s argument is that to ensure the stability of society the two principles of justice are needed to govern the assignment of rights and regulate the inequality (Rawls 1971, 53). Any infringement of an individuals rights or inequality outside the parameters of the principles of justice are unjust. In order to understand Rawls, one has to understand the theoretical concept of the original position. It lays the groundwork for Rawls’s argument by providing a foundation for society. Calling it a state where people reason without bias is a very general definition that does not at all fully explain all of the different aspects of the original position. The original position, according to Rawls, has to do with a social contract (Rawls 1971, 11). People agree to rules in society that are pursuant to their own general well being. However, they decide on these rules behind what Rawls calls a veil of ignorance. Behind this veil of ignor... ... middle of paper ... ... his principles of justice to evaluate such an inequality. If rights were not being infringed then he would immediately move on to the second principle criteria. In this scenario, if the workers were getting the greatest benefit then the inequality presented would be justified. For example, if the corporation were putting the increased profits into safer equipment for its workers, or providing insurance, compensation, etc. then it could be said that the inequality is justified. However, if the corporation were keeping it’s profits then the workers are least advantaged, but not getting the greatest benefit, so the inequality would be unjust in Rawls eyes. Allowing the inequality to continue would lead to instability in society and it would violate Rawls’s principles. Works Cited Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap of Harvard UP, 1971. Print.

Show More
Related

  • John Rawls On Justice Analysis

    1184 Words  | 3 Pages

    Why does it matter? Why do humans harp on the topics of justice and equality consistently? The answers to above mentioned questions aren’t easy to formulate, and they open up a door to greater questions about morality, humanity and so forth. Humans live in a cooperative society. The aim of this body of organization is to advance as a whole and individually simultaneously. John Rawls’ states this goal of human society in Distributive Justice published in 1979: “We may think of the human society as a more or less self-sufficient association regulated by a common conception of justice and aimed at advancing the good of its members.” Hence, our society is shaped by an idea of justice – one that is applicable to all members of this society, and this set conception of justice promotes the advancement of the society and the individuals living in

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Justice And The Common Good By Sandel

    1158 Words  | 3 Pages

    In his chapter, “Justice and the Common Good,” in the book, Justice, Sandel focuses on the issue of discriminating against homosexuals in a passage that appears in a section/chapter called, “Same-Sex Marriage.” Sandel opens the passage by saying same-sex marriages bring up moral and religious controversies. Next, he indicates that to allow heterosexuals to get married, wrongly discriminates against lesbians and gays. Following that, Sandel points out that the law denies them equality. Having made his point, Sandel then tells readers there are three options to turn to about this. We can recognize only marriages between a man and a woman, we can recognize same-sex marriage and opposite-sex marriages, or we can eliminate all marriages all together.

    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

  • Media Ethics By Philip Rawls Theory Of Justice?

    1568 Words  | 4 Pages

    On November 25, 1999 a pair of sports fishermen found a raft floating with immigrants aboard off the Fort Lauderdale coast. Aboard were two adults and one young boy. The young boys name was Elian Gonzalez, he was five years old.

    Read More

  • Rawls Theory Of Justice

    3346 Words  | 7 Pages

    ...s that mean Rawls will account for skin color as a primary good? It could be argued that the benefits received and enjoyed by those white peoples are due to their lack of color and thus, color would then become a standardized form of primary good. But accounting the color of one’s skin as a natural asset them presumes that the worst off in society are always colored while the elite are always white peoples. While this is a vast generalization of the concept, it holds true as the principle seeks to subvert those who use natural talents to succeed. The color of one’s skin is both a natural talent and one that can be exploited for maximum gain. But it does not factor in the reality that shifts in the social sphere can make that advantage into a burden. Furthermore, there is a significant generalization of labelling the success of individuals based on skin color alone.

    Read More

  • Namit Arora's Essay 'What Do We Deserve'

    958 Words  | 2 Pages

    Arguments about fairness and justice have been up for debate for centuries. "What do we deserve?", a question that has many individuals raising their brows to their efforts in their pursuit to achieve their goals. If it is said that we are all placed on an equal standard why are there individuals struggling to stay afloat? In Arora’s essay, he examines three forms of economic modals of social justices that question that idea of why the prosperous or the impecunious "deserve" their position or stature in life. Out of all of Arora's economic modals that he presents the Meritocratic System is the fairest because it gives everyone a fighting chance.

    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

  • Original Position And Veil Of Ignorance Analysis

    229 Words  | 1 Pages

    In Rawls’ Essay, we can point out contemporary and historical issues to his main points. Original Position is when there is an “injustice of a law is not a sufficient ground for not complying with it any more than the legal validity of legislation is always sufficient to require obedience to it” (Rawls 348). An example of both original position and veil of ignorance would be slavery, because they considered slaves to be property and had no equal rights or protection as others. Original Position is connected to slavery, people became slaves by being captured, purchased, or by birth. Slaves were born with “equal powers and rights” and didn’t know their past, present, or future (Rawls 347). Veil of Ignorance proves that slaves “do not know their

    Read More

  • Rawls Veil Of Ignorance Research Paper

    403 Words  | 1 Pages

    If I could wave a magic wand and apply Rawls’ veil of ignorance on a group in society, I would choose lawmakers. Applying Rawls’ veil of ignorance to this group is the best strategy to live out Rawls’ theory by helping the most people become equal. It is so crucial that the people who are ultimately governing our society are doing so in the best interests of all people. As a result, I think that the laws being made would be less targeted at groups of people but rather society as a whole.

    Read More

  • Rawls Social Justice

    870 Words  | 2 Pages

    At the point when a procedure or result does not comport with any of Rawls' standards, we can presume that it is not predictable with social justice. That is, something is not predictable with Rawls' origination of social justice in the event that it intervenes with any individual's faulty cases to equivalent fundamental freedoms (the "equivalent freedoms rule"); or if imbalances in the public eye are not appended to business locales and positions open to all under states of reasonable balance of chance (the "equivalent open door guideline"); or if disparities in the public arena are not organized to the best banquet of the minimum advantaged parts of society (the "distinction

    Read More

  • John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

    959 Words  | 2 Pages

    middle of paper ... ... The individual in the original position is unlikely to gamble their human rights for the greater good, particularly if they are mutually disinterested, so it is unreasonable in practicality to assume such altruism on their behalf. To conclude, Rawls’ strengths lie in his focus on the individual, protection of liberty, and equal opportunity, which supports a healthy society. The criticisms of his theory include a question as to what is best for society as a whole, dismissal of beneficial inequalities and the potential for society to develop its own code of ethics as it has in reality.

    Read More

  • The Philosophies Of John Rawls Vs. Nozick

    792 Words  | 2 Pages

    Nozick agrees with the liberty principle proposed by Rawls, but he disagrees with the equality principle and the fashion in which resources are distributed. I believe the historical principle of distribution is one strength of Nozick’s ideas. The historical principle of distribution states that the justice of any distribution does not depend on how closely it resembles any form of an equality pattern but how the distribution came about (959). I also agree with the theory that people are entitled to anything they acquired voluntarily and anything that is transferred to them voluntarily (958). Nozick does not agree with redistribution of wealth because taking resources from one person to benefit others is not necessarily voluntary. The biggest weaknesses of Nozick’s idea of equality comes from the idea that taxation and federally funded programs would be unjust forcing everything to be owned privately. This creates the most issues because people are self-interested and the virtue of market may not create the balance which Nozick proposed. Public school systems and public roads being deemed illegitimate would create issues with access. Also, making taxation illegal would make it difficult to have services like a police force, fire department, court system, or penal system because they would have to be paid by the individual directly. The police and court systems could become corrupt

    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

  • Rawls Justice Is Fairness

    1008 Words  | 3 Pages

    & nbsp;                                       Take Home Exam # 1: Essay-2 John Rawls never claimed to know the only way to start a society, but he did suggest a very sound and fair way to do so. He based his scenario on two principles of justice. His first principle of justice was that everyone should have the same rights as others.

    Read More

More about A Theory of Justice Presented by John Rawls

Open Document