A Comparison Of Social Construct Theory And Kantian Theory

Morality is defined as “the degree to which something is right and good: the moral goodness or badness of something” (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). Describing morality is rather simple, but what’s left to question is what determines the rightness or goodness of a thing or action. Using two ethical theories, Social Construct Theory and Kantian Theory I propose the answer to this question; the morality of an action is determined by agreements and the “categorical imperative”.
Social Contract Theory is based on the idea that actions are morally right if they are made under an agreement. This agreement doesn’t necessarily have to be communicated, it can also be assumed. (Timmons, 2014, p. 29) An example of this in today’s society is abiding by the
In his version Rawls proposes that a person must put himself or herself in an “original position” which is depicted by a “veil of ignorance” (Timmons, 2014, p. 30). This means that a person must forget who they are entirely. In this state, the person is asked to create societal rules. Rawls proposes that people will agree to two principles while creating societal rules: The Principle of Greatest Equal Liberty and the Difference Principle (Timmons, 2014, p. 30). The idea of these principles is that any person would give all people an equal chance in life and make it so the benefits of the rich could not negatively affect the poor. The assumption is made that people will make these decisions because they are unaware of their social status due to the “veil of ignorance”. The agreements that one makes in this circumstance or deemed by Rawls as morally
A major difference in the two theories is the environment in which a person has to determine what is a morally right and wrong action. In Rawls’ version of Social Construct Theory people are invited to make their agreements, which justify what is moral and immoral, in a state where they do not know who they are. However, in Kantian’s theory a person has to decide, without a façade, what is justifiably moral. These theories are similar in the way that Rawls’ version of Social Contract Theory is based off of a Kantian-style consideration of people. In both theories people must decide what is moral from a universal point of view; behind the veil of ignorance for Rawls’ theory and believing that a moral action is something that everyone can do constantly for Kant’s