Two Associations with the Unencumbered Self
The unencumbered self separates who I am from my attributes and desires. Rawls encounters the unencumbered self in proposing both the veil of ignorance and the difference principle; both separate the subject from the attributes and ends of the subject. Rawls denies both the utilitarian and libertarian views as practical solutions, and puts forward the veil of ignorance and difference principle as a third alternative. This paper will begin with briefly describing what Sandel considers the unencumbered self. I will outline utilitarianism and liberalism as theories Rawls rejects, as well as Rawls’ philosophy as a practical Kantianism. I will identify the unnecessary transition Rawls makes from the veil of ignorance, which has much merit, to the difference principle, which Sandel adequately dissolves. I will address Sandel’s critique and his fourth alternative, the moderately-encumbered self, and give my impression of a Rawlsian reaction to Sandel’s fourth alternative. In conclusion I hope to show that Rawls encounters the unencumbered self at the veil of ignorance as well as the difference principle, the former being both applicable and a contribution to political philosophy, and the latter being cogently refuted by Sandel.
Sandel describes the unencumbered self as valuing the ability to choose one’s own ends, rather than valuing specific ends in themselves. The unencumbered self draws a line of distinction between me and my attributes and desires, and presupposes that no project or commitment could weigh so heavily for me that I would not know who I am without it. Who I am is permanently unchanging, but the ends I desire or the attributes which I possess may be constantl...
... middle of paper ...
... a more moderate view, the moderately-encumbered self, it is one Rawls would not accept because of its deviation from Kantian sacrifice and duty. In presenting the veil of ignorance, Rawls gives us a means to arrive at categorically worthwhile and acceptable political theories by channeling our inherent selfishness into political philosophy. In presenting the difference principle, Rawls denies an individual’s right to prosper from his own assets because he claims our assets are all arbitrarily distributed, but he does not justify sharing with society one’s prosperity because that would also be equally arbitrary. Sandel presents an alternative that Rawls would reject because it is not in accord with Kantian duty and sacrifice.
Works Cited
Goodin, Robert and Philip Pettit. Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Anthology. Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997.
Kaplan, Justin. "Born to Trouble: One Hundred Years of Huckleberry Finn." Mark Twain Adventures of Huckleberry Finn: A Case Study in Critical Controversy. Eds. Gerald Graff and James Phelan. Boston: St. Martin's, 1995. 348-359.
To begin with, Anne Bradstreet and Edward Taylor describe their marriage and spouse with a different tone. Bradstreet uses words that
Clemens, Samuel. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. The Heath Anthology of American Literature. Ed. Paul Lauter, et al. 2nd ed. Vol. 2. Lexington: Heath, 1994. 236-419.
...cal Edition, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, An Authoritative Text Backgrounds and Sources Criticism. Ed. and Trans. Sculley Bradley, Richmond Croom Beaty, E. Hudson Long, and Thomas Cooley. New York: Norton, 1977. 328-335.
Robert Nozick in the excerpt from his book Anarchy, State and Utopia presents his ideas on why a government in power should not spread the wealth of the state among all of the residents. Nozick writes mainly in response to John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice in which Rawls focuses on the idea of the state working towards improving financially the lives of those that are in the worst conditions. To explain his point of view Nozick expounds on various concepts that provide a better understanding of the procedure that lead to him arriving at the conclusion that he did. This includes the entitlement theory of Nozick. In this paper I will explain how Nozick reaches the conclusion that redistributive justice should not take place along with a detailed look at the various major concepts of his theory. In addition, I will also provide my view on what John Rawls’s argument against Nozick’s theory might be. Finally, I will explain why I agree with John Rawl’s theory and present detailed reasoning.
Twain, Mark, and Cynthia Johnson. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2009. Print.
Rawls begins his work by defining the role of the principles of justice “to specify the fair terms of social cooperation. These principles specify the basic rights and duties to be assigned by the main political and social institutions, and they regulate the division of benefits arising from social cooperation and allot the burdens necessary to sustain it.” (7) Through these fair principles of justice, Rawls aims to build a realistic utopia. The two principles of justice he spells out in his work are: “Each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all; and
On November 4, 1970 in Los Angeles, California Genie’s condition was brought to attention by a social worker. The worker discovered the 13-year old girl in a small, dimly lit, confined bedroom. An investigation by authorities exposed that the child had spent most of her life in this room and typically was tied to a potty chair. Genie was found in diapers because she was not potty trained. Her case is an example of extreme isolation from human contact, society, sunlight, and any other environments besides her room. The deprivation of attachment showed when she was timid to humans, almost afraid. Someone whose life was a developmental nightmare could not possibly be expected to have the basic trust that the world is trustworthy and predictable. The life she lived was incredibly horrifying as morals, and psychology portray just how severe the consequences were on Genie.
John Stuart Mill believes in a utilitarian society where people are seen as “things.” Moreover, in utilitarianism the focus of the goal is “forward-looking”, in looking at the consequences but not the ini...
I will begin this paper by making clear that this is a critique of Rawls and his difference principle and not an attempt at a neutral analysis. I have read the Theory of Justice and I have found it wanting in both scope and realism. The difference principle proposed by Rawls, his second principle is the focus of my critique. While this paper will not focus solely on the second principle, all analysis done within this essay are all targeted towards the scope of influence that Rawls treats the second principle with.
Twain, Mark. “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” Concise Anthology of American Literature. Ed. George McMichael, James Leonard, 7th ed. New York City: Pearson, 2011. 1187- 1365. Print
... we should embrace what is already upon us. To transcend social meanings of what people values will not help solving current problems. Walzer’s grasp on the pluralistic nature of human ideology is the more pragmatic solution. Rawlsian distribution of goods is practically impossible since it requires so many rigors to enforce the equality of men. The separation of spheres, however, provides a solution that to which it embraces what humans already have. To create new principles, means that people have to start over and detach themselves. I favor Walzer’s point of view because it recognizes that humans are not monistic but have a multiplicity of ideas that make life more complex than just simple and rational equality. In this sense, the conclusions is that the separation and the recognition of distinct classes of goods is the concept of Walzer’s complex equality.
Trafton, A. (2013, June 23). MIT News. Enhancing RNA Interference, pp. 1-2. Retrieved 12 16, 2013, from http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2013/enhancing-rna-interference-0623.html
Genie’s abuse and social isolation was mainly a result of her father’s decision and justification that Genie was severely mentally retarded and believed hiding her from the world was the best option for everyone (Curtiss, 1988). The only visual stimuli that Genie could interact with were her potty chair, crib, carpet, and plain empty walls. Genie’s severe neglect and abuse in her childhood ultimately lead her t...
...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.