John Rawls Distributive Justice Analysis

1347 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: John rawls distributive justice essay summary

As members, it is our expectation that the foundation of our society is constructed based off the origins of justice. Starting from an early age, we have been taught to recite the Pledge of Allegiance of the United States that promises, “liberty and justice for all.” It is not until we are older however, that we begin to question if and how society enforces distributive justice and the impact that social institutions play in our lives. The philosophers, John Rawls and Robert Nozick, devise two opposing perspectives to reach the same end, when tackling the controversial issue of injustice. This paper will first analyze the positions of Rawls and defend Rawls’ position by disproving Nozick’s counterexample for committing a fallacy of composition. …show more content…

Social identities that classify who people are influence their behavior and judgments and are often the source of inequality. If people were to overlook the barrier of these distinctions, it would leave them with only rationality to reason with. Eliminating these biases, Rawls argues that the playing field is neutralized because “no one is able to design principles to favor his particular …show more content…

The counterexample begins with a just society of members, including the legendary basketball player Wilt Chamberlain. Chamberlain has signed with a team following the arrangement that 25 cents of each game ticket will be directly distributed to him. His fans, including the low tier of society, happily buy tickets to watch his games, putting Chamberlain at a greater advantage earning $250,000 by the end of the season. A patterned theory would reason that the previous egalitarian society has transformed into a non-egalitarian one from unequal distribution in the population. Nozick emphasizes the features of a free society, arguing that the series of transactions was done voluntary and immorally and cannot be classified as unjust. He concludes that an end state theory fails because those who are worse off give quarters to someone who is better off, resulting in a different situation that undermines the

Show More
Related

  • Difference Matters Summary

    1379 Words  | 3 Pages

    In her book, Difference Matters, Brenda Allen discusses the importance of identity in an individual and in society. She addresses specific factors, from age to social class, that affect society. In her first chapter, more specifically, she talks about these factors as a whole in introducing the why differences matter. She then lays out the issues associated with differences in society. There are misinterpretations and misconceptions that become problematic between the relationship with individuals and society. This chapter is perfect for my topic because it shows that people differ from

    Read More

  • Robert Nozick's Libertarian Views of Justice in "Anarchy, Stat, And Utopia"

    895 Words  | 2 Pages

    Robert Nozick uses the example of Wilt Chamberlain to develop his theories on entitlement and distribution by establishing his libertarian view of justice in chapter 7 of his book "Anarchy, Stat, And Utopia" . Wilt Chamberlain, the basketball star, charges fans twenty-five cents to watch him play. Nozick creates a world in which we are to assume that the actions leading to this point, for all people, are just. Chamberlain simply offers his services to those who wish to attend the event. Assuming that he continues his show for some time, and people continue to pay the twenty-five cent fee, Chamberlain could generate a great deal of revenue. The people who paid their twenty-five cents did so freely, and although they are left with less money, Wilt Chamberlain has become a very wealthy man. Furthermore, Nozick encourages this example to be used within one’s desired philosophical and political utopia, and it would be fair to say that Will acquired his earnings in a way that has not violated the rights of another individual. Because Chamberlain's earning arose from a just, distributive starting point, the voluntary support of his fans should also be considered just. However, to fully understand how Nozick draws his conclusions about the validity of Chamberlain’s financial gain, is to understand the framework for the historical and non-patterned lenses through which he views the minimal state.

    Read More

  • The Argument Against Nozick's 'Distributive Justice

    880 Words  | 2 Pages

    1 Robert Nozick, “’Distributive Justice’ from Anarchy, State and Utopia” in Tamar Szabó Gendler, Susanna Siegel, and Steven M. Cahn (eds.), The Elements of Philosophy: Readings from Past and Present (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 309—310.

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Nozick And John Rawls

    1326 Words  | 3 Pages

    Everyone should possess equal basic rights and liberties 2. “Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage and attached to positions and offices open to all (Rawls 53).” He uses a social contract to develop his ethical theory of 'justice as fairness.' Rawls argues that in order to work out the basic principles of a society, each of us should be placed under a veil of ignorance (Rawls 11). The veil of ignorance places individuals at a zero point position where they know nothing about their own social class, current wealth, psychological propensity, talents or conception of the good (Rawls 11). From this ignorance, we are able to produce the basic principles about how our society should be run since everyone would concerned for everyone equally as they do not know who is advantaged and who is not (Rawls

    Read More

  • John Rawls's Theory Of Social Justice

    1529 Words  | 4 Pages

    Imagine that all of the sudden memories of your life and everyone you’ve ever known suddenly disappeared. In this scenario, all knowledge you had of your talents, social status, financial standing, physical ability, intelligence and the other characteristics that you viewed could to definitively set yourself apart from others. In other words, everything that made you who you are through years of socialization all of the sudden vanished. To the John Rawls this scenario is called the original position, one where your consciousness has been placed under a “veil of ignorance”. As a thought experiment, Rawls argues that if individuals of a society discuss and define their system of social justice from the original position, the result of the discussion

    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

    John Rawls and Robert Nozick both provide compelling and thought provoking theories regarding the values of liberty and equality. Rawls focuses on both liberty and equality while Nozick theorizes exclusively on liberty. The ideas of Rawls and Nozick have multiple strengths as well as weaknesses which allow for debate and comparison between the two theories.

    Read More

  • Theory Of Justice In John Rawls's Theory Of Justice

    2303 Words  | 5 Pages

    John Rawls’ Theory of Justice attempts to establish a fair and reasonable social account of social justice. To do this, he discusses two fundamental principles of justice, which if implemented into society, would guarantee a just and fair way of life. Rawls is mostly concerned with the social good (what is good and just), and his aim with the Theory of Justice is to provide a way that society could be one that is fair and just, while taking into consideration, a person’s primary goods (rights and liberties, opportunities, income and wealth, and the social bases of self-respect). The usage of these principles will lead to an acceptable basis of self-respect. That saying, if the two principles are fair and just, then the final primary good,

    Read More

  • What is Wrong with Slavery?: Utilitarian Thought

    733 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout the paper, Hare reiterates the example of how sometimes people can claim that they face injustice by spouting out actions or events that they believe is an unjust to them, without providing any substantial evidence or reasons as to why these actions causes them injustice. He explains how this example construes as a bad argument with weak conclusions, providing unsubstantial ideas to society. Before Hare even goes into the rebuttal of the claim...

    Read More

  • An Ideal Society in John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

    535 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice presents an ideal society based on several simple principles. While the system Rawls suggests is well constructed, it is not without its flaws. I will now attempt to explain Rawls’ idea of Justice as Fairness and explain where the system fails.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • The Making of a Just Society

    1913 Words  | 4 Pages

    The overarching theme that John Rawls presents as the “original position” is a contract that would be signed willingly by all people, something that an entire population could agree upon. The focus is to make a society as just as possible through the rules and r...

    Read More

  • Essay On Justice By John Rawls

    646 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Rawls begins Justice as fairness, by identifying the fundamental purpose of society as to provide justice through a social contract; to achieve justice is to attenuate any social and economic inequalities throughout the course of citizens’ lives and achieve equal opportunities for all member of a society despite predispositions such as gender and race. To bring this normative idea into perspective, Rawls asks individuals forming a society to adopt a “veil of ignorance,” an attitude in which no one knows what place he or she would occupy in the society to be created, when it comes to choosing policies for a society so as to make sure that the rules would hold highest considerations for those in the most unfortunate positions of society. In the course of articulation, Rawls identifies two principles: “Each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the scheme of liberties for all; and [and the second principle being] social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions; first, they are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle)” (Rawls pg. 42). One of Rawls' critics argues that Rawls' approach assumes that the resources to be (re-) distributed to implement his principles of justice are treated as if they are not already owned by the current holders and, consequently, disregards the effect redistribution would have on those persons' lives. Hitherto, this claim has no basis to stand or even damage Rawls’ overall arguments.

    Read More

More about John Rawls Distributive Justice Analysis

Open Document