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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

    INTRODUCTION John Rawls most famous work, A Theory of Justice, deals with a complex system of rules and principles. It introduces principles of justice to the world, principles which Rawls argues, are meant to create and strengthen equality while removing the inequality which exists within society. These principles are both meant as standalone laws and regulations, but they can be joined as well. The main function of the first principle is to ensure the liberty of every individual, while the second principle is meant to be the force for the removal of inequality through what Rawls calls distributive justice. I will begin this paper by making clear that this is a critique of Rawls and his principle of difference and not an attempt at a neutral analysis.

    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

  • John Rawls: “Original Position”

    1126 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rawls creates a hypothetical society, via a thought experiment known as the “Veil of Ignorance,” in which all that you knew of yourself is eliminated from your mind to allow you to come to a rational decision on how you would like your society to be organized. Rawls principle is that under a social contract what is right must be the same for everyone. The essence of Rawls' “veil of ignorance” is that it is designed to be a representation of persons purely in their capacity as free and equal moral persons. Out of this experiment Rawls provides us with two basic p...

    Read More

  • The Original Position and the Veil of Ignorance

    1361 Words  | 3 Pages

    Political philosopher John Rawls believed that in order for society to function properly, there needs to be a social contract, which defines ‘justice as fairness’. Rawls believed that the social contract be created from an original position in which everyone decides on the rules for society behind a veil of ignorance. In this essay, it will be argued that the veil of ignorance is an important feature of the original position. First, the essay will describe what the veil of ignorance is. Secondly, it will look at what Rawls means by the original position. Thirdly, it will look at why the veil of ignorance is an important feature of the original position. Finally, the essay will present a criticism to the veil of ignorance and the original position and Rawls’ potential response to this.

    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

  • 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

  • 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 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

  • Rawls Social Justice

    870 Words  | 2 Pages

    The requesting of the standards proposes that, to Rawls, fairness is the most critical component of social justice. Fairness implies a reasonable appropriation of each of the limits required "to be typical and completely coordinating parts of society over a complete life" (Rawls, 2003: 18). Rawls clarifies that the need of fairness implies that the second rule (which incorporates the distinction

    Read More

More about A Theory of Justice Presented by John Rawls

Open Document