Social and Economic Justice The term justice, in its simplest state, is defined as “the process or result of using laws to fairly judge and punish crimes and criminals” (Merriam-Webster). This means that in order to declare if an action is just or not, it is first imperative to set standards as to which actions are deemed acceptable by society and which are not. Once these standards are set, each and every action can be judged based on the previously set standards allowing society to rule whether the action taken is just or not. When it comes to justice, there are several different subsets that must be considered. The two subsets that will be compared and contrasted throughout this essay include merit-based justice and equality based justice. …show more content…
His definition is split into two sections, which he refers to as liberty and wealth. Liberty, which is Rawls first principle, says “Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.” (Rawls). Although Rawls refers to this principle as liberty, it is in fact the ideology that accompanies social justice. The second principle of justice according to Rawls happens to be wealth otherwise known as economic justice. According to Rawls, the wealth portion of justice claims that “Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings principle, and attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.” (Rawls). Therefore, although merit based justice and equality based justice do have some close similarities, merit based justice is a more useful and therefore more valid form of justice due to its ability to reward and punish …show more content…
According to MacKinnon, this principle says “that we should treat equals equally and unequal’s unequally” (MacKinnon, p.130). In order to apply this principle, it is important to be able to understand what MacKinnon means by equals and unequal’s. Equals in my opinion would be those people that have similar qualities and character traits. If two people are both interviewing for a position at a company, this principle would require that the decision is made based on their credentials and is in no way swayed by differences in skin color, religious beliefs, or any other quality in which discrimination can exist. An example of this discrimination that I am referring to would be back in the segregation days, when whites and blacks were treated differently solely based on the color of their skin. Although they both may have been equally qualified and deserved equal treatment, the abundance of people who were controlled by discrimination in this time period caused an unjust way of going about the way of people treated each other. The reasoning for this would be that both groups of people were humans with many different similarities. This differential treatment would have been seen as unjust when considered based on equality based justice. Over the past few decades, discrimination in the United States has
In “What Do We Deserve?”, Arora takes a look at political philosophies and asks an important question, “How much of my good life do I really deserve?.” He brings up that argument that the contest of life is “rigged from the start” (Arora). How do one fix the contest so it's fair for everyone? Society can start by leveling the playing field to give everyone an equal chance, eliminating the idea of winner vs. loser, and encouraging and rewarding hard work and natural talents. Once the system is repaired, then we will see that those who make the effort and take advantage of their own gifts will succeed and be truly deserving of their earnings.
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).
Rawls states that you cannot reimburse for the sufferings of the distressed by enhancing the joys of the successful. Fairness according to him occurs when the society makes sure that every individual is treated equally before the law and given a c...
What I argue, however, is that the difference principle proposes to remove inequality from society but fails in this endeavor due to retaining enough inequality to benefit the disadvantaged, leaving the principle defective in its nature. This will be the question analyzed in this essay where I will first explain the two principles proposed by Rawls as well as the lexical order or priority, which is a central feature within A Theory of Justice. I will then begin an analysis of these ideas and explain the reason for my critique of the principles. Each section will deal with an in-depth analysis of what Rawls proposes to do and then examine the scope behind such an action, ending with why it falls short of the intended result.
A Theory of Justice is the magnum opus of 20th century social contract theorist and political philosopher, John Rawls. A bit of background into this work is that social contract theory had fallen out of favor with political scientists and philosophers since the last 18th century, with the success of the American Revolution and the apparent triumph of John Locke and Democracy. However, with the advent of modern globalization, the emergence of America as a superpower, but the growing concern of socio-economic disparity necessitated a revisiting of the social contract, what it means, how societies and governments were best constructed.
Economic Injustice in America "Class is for European democracies or something else--it isn't for the United States of America. We are not going to be divided by class." -George Bush, the forty-first President of the United States (Kalra 1) The United States of America was founded on the basis of a "classless society of equals," committed to eliminating the past injustices imposed on them by Great Britain.
Stanley Fish was brilliant to point out the different out looks on "fairness". People choose indivually what id fair, but this does not mean that the stndards of the comm...
They reject the egalitarian claim because the individual should have their own right to do what they please with their property.... ... middle of paper ... ... All of these factors demonstrate a main principle that Rawls wants people to seek the right to utilize their own talents without being worried about what others are going to think or feel about them; either they are good or bad. Rawls is suggesting that this is done by sharing one
Equality and equal opportunity are two terms that have changed or have been redefined over the last 100 years in America. The fathers of our constitution wanted to establish justice and secure liberty for the people of the United States. They wrote about freedom and equality for men, but historically it has not been practiced. In the twentieth century large steps have been made to make the United States practice the ideals declared in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The major changes following Rosa Park’s refusal to give up her bus seat to a young white man and the Brown v. Board of Education trial in 1954. These Supreme Court rulings altered American society and began the desegregation and integration movements. In the 1950’s many writers took interest in writing about segregation, desegregation, integration and black history in general. Many historians write about segregation still existing today and the problems in which integration never had the chance to correct.
...nly distributed, and no traces of economic justice even exist. People living in poverty need some kind of hope, some sign that their government has not forgotten them. The truth is, there are plenty of people who do care, and there are many efforts to help. The discrepancies are simply too big to go unnoticed, and a change is inevitable. As for right now, the trend continues. The rich get super-richer, the poor get poorer
Justice is synonymous with fairness- who gets what and what is what. We will see how ultimately justice is freedom, and it is in fact in looking at injustice, that we best understand justice. To look at the persuasiveness of both Nozick and Rawls, it is necessary for us
Social Justice is about making society function better – providing the support and tools to help turn lives around. This is a challenging new approach to dealing with poverty in all its forms. It is not about income poverty alone.(SJS) Throughout this essay I will explore why Poverty is a primary issue when striving for Social Justice and how, we as professionals, can attempt to overcome this by working together to achieve a fairer more just society. Social Work, Primary Education and Community Learning and Development are working together collaboratively to achieve Social Justice. I will discuss the changes that have taken place in our professions and the guidelines and regulations that we must adhere to. In addition to this I will examine the positive and negative outcomes of my group experience working together with CLD, Social Work and Education Students. I will also address the historical perspective in addition to the philosophical perspectives.
`Justice as Fairness' gives a lengthy description of the primary subject of justice, which states that it is "The way in which the major social institutions describe fundamental rights and duties and determine the division of advantages from social co operations." Put simply this means that, according to Rawls, social justice focuses on the basic structure of a society and its social institutions, its political constitution and its economic and social arrangements.
One of the leading political philosophers, John Rawls` foundational idea was that justice is a demand of fairness. Fairness is a demand for impartiality (Sen, 2010). His work, Theory of Justice (1970) is based on the idea of justice and fairness, and he argues that it is the basic structure of society (Hoffman & Graham, 2015). Rawls presents justice as fairness as a `political conception of justice` (Farrelly, 2004). In his Theory of Justice there are two main principles of justice. The first is equal liberty, means that each individual has the right to free speech, to vote or fair trial. The second ones are equal opportunity, and difference principle (Hoffman & Graham, 2015). It is also known as distributive economic justice. Rawls argued that however every human beings are born equal, sometimes they end up being unequal because of the social circumstances they grow up in, and the different opportunities they get (Boucher & Kelly, 2009). These different circumstances can result in unequal earnings and wealth distribution. Income inequality undermining the aim of equal opportunity. Child poverty is a global issue, according to the National Equality Panel report (Child Poverty Action Group,
The Importance of Justice in Society One component of the definition of justice is the final outcome of the process of the law, whereby justice is distributed by the State. According to this definition, justice is the mechanical process of the structure of law – set in place and agreed to by the people of the State. Another definition is concerned with the value inherent in ‘just’ behavior. One distinction between these two definitions is the difference between an individual viewpoint and the larger view of the society. Either view incorporates the concept of moral judgment; ‘good’ as opposed to ‘bad’.