Argument Repair John Rawls

1252 Words3 Pages

Argument Repair Essay
In this essay I will endeavor to explain what John Rawls' central argument in his article, Justice as Fairness is as I understand it, explain what I believe to be the strongest objection or flaw to this argument, and finally attempt to reasonably alter Rawls' initial argument to silence this objection.


Philosopher John Rawls established his understanding of justice as fairness in his work, A Theory of Justice. Borrowing elements from Immaneul Kant and utilitarian philosophy, Rawls constructed and detailed a method for the moral evaluation of social and political issues. Rawls presented the question; just how would one develop an entirely new social contract for today's society? And do so fairly? He acknowledged the fact that you couldn't rid your self of biases, but instead you could choose to attempt to minimize them. Enter his ideas of the 'Original Position' and the 'Veil of Ignorance'.

The Veil of Ignorance erases everything you know about yourself; political beliefs, position in society, sex, race, and even your inherited abilities; behind this all persons are truly equal. However, every individual does retain …show more content…

However, once property rights and the right to self-ownership is included, a contradiction occurs. In order for Rawls' theory to stand on its own, Rawls must reject the concept of absolute property rights; but at the same time, Nozick argues, the absolute right to property is one of the basic individual rights that must be protected. Above all, there is one last argument against Rawls' Theory of Justice; that you can't make rational choices while ignorant. Rawls details that the individuals operating from beneath his Veil of Ignorance are supposed to lack knowledge and come to a rational conclusion, but to act rationally requires said

Open Document