Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Fairness in teaching
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Fairness in teaching
Fair is what you think you should have, and someone else should not have. If you do not have something that you really think you should have such as money, a car, a phone, or any other thing that you want but do not have, but someone else has the item, this is my own definition of Fair. Fair is the word people use almost all the time when they do not get their way in life. If somebody else has an item that is better than yours, for example a phone most of the time you say it is not fair for them to have a better phone than you, simply because you do not have it. Fair is just a way of saying that the person that has the item you want is not supposed to have it because you do not have the item. The word fair is usually said by almost everybody …show more content…
People in 1st world countries use this word way more than people do in 3rd world countries. The people in the 1st world countries say that it is not fair because people have something that they want. People in 3rd world countries just think it is not fair that other people have the essentials such as food and drinking water. The other way I think you use the word fair is if one of your favorite sports teams do not win, as if they won, it would have been fair to you, but it would not have been fair to the other teams fan in the same position as you were in. My final statement of the word fair is how the word has changed over the past 30 or 40 years. People use the word fair today as a way of saying you should have what someone else has, or that something should happen because you believe in it, such as the sports team. But older people say how the word fair meant what you had and appreciated such as school, and a roof over your head. But the older people think that the new way to use the word fair is just an easy excuse to say you should have something that you want, even if you did not work hard for what you want, and you just think you should get everything handed to you. This is my extended definition of the word fair, you should use it as saying that if you do not have an item such as a phone, money, or anything else, and someone else has
The first standard of equality is ontological equality which is the notion that everyone is created equal at birth. Ontological equality often justifies material inequality. In fact, this type of equality is sometimes used to put forth the notion that poverty is a virtue. A second standard of equality is equality of opportunity meaning that “everyone has an equal chance to achieve wealth, social prestige, and power because the rules of the game, so to speak, are the same for everyone”( Conley, 247). Therefore, any existing inequality is fair as long as everyone plays by the rules. The standard of equality is equality of condition, which is the idea that everyone should have an equal starting point. The last form of equality is equality of outcome which states, everyone should end up with the same outcome regardless of
Hi folks, thanks for the response to my previous blog. However, my slothful ways have caught up to me and I need to complete this blog that’s become a few weeks overdue for the Minnesota State Fair. Although, I enjoyed my time at the Minnesota State Fair, although being worn down and tired of hordes of people, I decided not to travel to the Renaissance Fair the following day. However, The Minnesota State Fair was delightful and was able to partake in the music, the culture, and the delicious food. Although my dental regimen was not on par for the toothache that started after eating those sweet delectable cookies. I will explain later in the blog, certainly read further on a few tips for the 2016 Minnesota State Fair.
What is fairness? Fairness in law is decisions which will be made on the basis of a set of established rules that are known (Banks, 2007). For example, if there were no laws about using mobile phone while you are driving, it would be unfair for a person ...
...ird) like all together." And so it is, and always shall fair be foul and foul be fair.
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...
Under American law everyone is considered equal, the term equal refers to the many different ways people are treated the same in American society; even if they are not truly equal with each other. Everyone ranges from being poor to rich; they also range in
Life’s Not Fair - Deal With It and The American Electoral Process are very similar. If you’re an American citizen who’s over 18 and have been voting for years, you get the flow or process of how voting works. When you read the story, “The American Electoral Process” you find out how our votes are broken down. In most small states, the author explains how the people who vote don’t exactly vote for the president or the vice president. Their votes are broken down and choose who won the democratic and republican parties and it counts for their number of congressmen and senators. The author uses this as a direct example of unfairness. Relating to, “Life's Not Fair - Deal With It”, the book explains how life isn’t fair obviously, but also tells us
Stanley Fish was brilliant in pointing out the different looks on "fairness". People choose individually what is fair, but this does not mean that the standards of the common rules must change, they stay the same and people conform the rules to ways they believe is the correct approach(Baker, 149).... ... middle of paper ... ...
...s due process. Due process is best defined in one word--fairness. When a person is treated unfairly by the government, including the courts, he is said to have been deprived of or denied due process.
Fish, Stanley. “Fair is Fair”. Everything is an Argument. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruzkiewics. And Keith Walters. 6th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2013. 948-50. Print
Does justice require that people are given what they deserve? According to Pojman (2006), justice is the constant and perpetual will to give every man his due. This would seem to imply that for justice to be carried out, people must get what they deserve. But there is some debate over what being just entails; to be just is to be fair, but is being fair truly to give people what they deserve?
I could cite several examples where I thought a judge’s or jury’s ruling was not fair, but I won’t because frankly, we’ve all seen those. I actually believe in our legal system, and I believe in justice. I believe in justice as an ideal that we strive for, and that is what it means to me. The legal system, when looked at closer, is not justice but instead judgment. You can be punished when found guilty, in a number of ways, but who knows if they’re “fair” punishments, it’s all a matter of opinion.
Therefore Rawls believes that in order to achieve a just state, it must be constructed in the most unbiased way possible. And so one might say that the original position is "the appropriate initial status quo, and thus the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair. This explains the propriety of the name `justice as fairness': it conveys the idea that the principles of justice are agreed to in an initial situation that is fair."
So if justice in considered to be fair, that would make something unjust, unfair, right? What if an innocent person was proven guilty in a court of law and spent time in jail or money to pay a fine? That would be considered just, because in the court of law he was in fact proven guilty, however it would also be unfair because the person is innocent. This is the same result in another case, the most current issue and most relative in my belief would be Affirmative Action. If justice is in fact fair, therefore not treating persons of different races or gender any different then Affirmative Action is unjust, and although I do not oppose such a policy, I still see it as unjust.
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.