Preview

John Rawls Theory of Societal Justice

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1767 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
John Rawls Theory of Societal Justice
Have you ever wondered what would be required in order to create a just society? Let us think from the perspective of societal ground zero. We have not been in existence for the past few thousand years. We have no ancestors to direct us, no rules to follow, and no experience to guide us. Imagine that we have not even come to be yet. Consider for a moment that society has yet to be established. Assume there are hypothetical homunculi with the sole task of devising the goals, the guiding light, for society. How would societal goals be designed so they are fair and just for all?
In what follows, I will attempt to portray the philosophy of John Rawls with regard to the theory of societal justice. My aim is convey Rawls’ conception of justice. I will discuss his original position of equality and how the essential veil of ignorance collaborates with the original position to arrive at a societal ground zero. I will also address the two principles that Rawls believe would emerge from the original position to guide a just society.
Rawls aspires to investigate and present a conception of justice. He believes that, in order to create a just society, we must begin in a hypothetical place with no predetermined conceptions of social or economic status. No person would know his place in society, or what social or economic class he fits into. No one would be aware of his own intelligence or abilities. Further still, no person would know what assets or disadvantages were distributed to him by chance, generation, or inheritance. This hypothetical position of unknowing would create an “original position of equality” (Rawls, p. 498). From this original position, everyone is equal in all conceivable societal and economic terms.
In this initial position of equality, there would be totally free, completely rational homunculi that are interested in fostering their own interests. Rawls believes the free, rational, and self-interested homunculi in this hypothetical initial position of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    John Rawls’ Fairness Approach is an appropriate ethical framework to use when assessing this dilemma. This approach questions if everyone involved is being treated fairly (is there favoritism and discrimination?). The Fairness Approach examines how fairly or unfairly the actions of an individual or group distribute benefits and burdens everyone else. With this approach, consistency of treatment among persons is key. The only insistence when treatment must differ is if there is a morally relevant difference between people (Andre, Meyer, Shanks, Velasquez, 1989). There are three different kinds of justice -- Distributive, Restorative, and Compensatory. Distributive justice focuses on the benefits and burdens evenly distributed amongst society’s…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When you picture equality, do you see people carrying around heavy bags of birdshot on their necks with the reasoning that they are “stronger than the average person”? No, I didn’t think so. The point I’m trying to get at, is in the short story “Harrison Bergeron” the matter of equality is taken far out of proportion. Total equality is absolutely impossible. It doesn’t matter how many restrictions you put on people, there will always be people who are superior to others.…

    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Theories of justice are also referred to in the article. These theories utilize concepts by John Rawls which include ideas on how to “create an environment of opportunity and access by all to the most comprehensive range of prospects” (Colin, 2012, p. 444). This theory can lead to a society where individuals are given opportunities to succeed.…

    • 1775 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    This paper aims to compare the ideas of equal opportunities and sports equity with regard to sport in Britain. Within this structure, there will be particular emphasis on the theoretical approaches that are used to look at equality in British sport. A key part of this comparison is the study of (social) equality; this includes formal, radical and liberal interpretations of equality. The arguments and suggestions will be reinforced and supported by literature and other texts outside of just the sporting context.…

    • 2881 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls bases his Theory of Justice on the intuitive conviction that justice as fairness is the first virtue of social institutions. He argues that in order to ensure fair distributions of advantages in society, a workable set of principles are required in order to determine how institutions ought to distribute rights and duties and to establish a clear way to address competing claims to social advantages. The second principle that Rawls develops stipulates that economic and social inequalities are justifiable so long as the requirements of fair equality of opportunity have been met and if they benefit the worst off in society. Rawls argues that the requirement of improving the conditions of the worst off, known as the Difference Principle,…

    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A just society should be one that leads to progression and protects an individual's rights and freedoms. In this paper I will take Rawls position that we would create a more just society by creating a minimum standard of living for everyone. One of the main points presented in Nozick’s theory is that redistribution is wrong because it is unjust to steal resources that were justly earned from one person and to give it to someone else. In principle Nozick is correct that redistribution is unjust in the sense that we are taking resources from one person to give to another, however, Nozick’s view doesn’t account for the fact that people aren’t born with equal opportunity so without redistribution it results in a hierarchy that keeps increasing.…

    • 1471 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Under the Veil of Ignorance, Rawls asks us to imagine what rules we would want to exist in the world, assuming that we do not know what kind of life we would have in the world. For example, it assumes that we do not know how we will look like, how much money will we have, or what sexual orientation will we have. In this position, Rawls states that the rationally self-interested person will ask themselves, “what if I were in the position of society’s least advantaged?…

    • 585 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    -because of the equality of ability, we are also naturally hopeful of attaining our ends, and thus are naturally competitive. Hobbes then says that, “therefore, if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies.”…

    • 748 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    (MacKinnon p. 291) In order for this idea to work the people involved would have to be free from bias, in other words they must not be able to tip the scales in their favor by knowing their positions in life. Rawls points out that people consider liberty to be particularly important and would therefore choose a society that supported equal rights. However wealth is not as important and therefore it is easier to accept inequality in wealth so long as ones basic needs are met. Rawls believes that people would choose the society that better serves the poorest citizens and provides them with equal opportunity to obtain…

    • 1879 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The issue of distributive justice is relevant in our society due to current thoughts on economic inequality in politics. The political philosophers John Rawls and Robert Nozick have differing views when it comes to the topic of distributive justice. This analyze the positions of John Rawls and Robert Nozick, finding that Nozick’s view of distribution is preferable to Rawls’ difference principle because people deserve to keep what they earn and their earnings should not be taken away from them because that would be a violation of their personal liberties.…

    • 1823 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Vs Nozick

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Therefore, both philosophers judge a society is just by how thoroughly its laws and policies follow their respective models rather than whether those laws and policies achieve morally acceptable outcomes. A primary difference between the two philosophies is the legitimacy of wealth distribution. According to Nozick, the possession of economic and social goods is only justified if it was made by means of just acquisitions or voluntary transfer. As a result, any form of taxation of the rich to, in turn, improve the prospects of the impoverished is unjustified and a violation of natural rights because it was involuntarily taxed from the rich. Therefore, Nozick believes there should be no safety net or welfare programs in a just state because such programs represent a fundamental violation of natural rights. In addition, Nozick finds it impossible to suggest that merely because society benefits from social cooperation, the impoverished deserve a fraction of the earnings rightly made by the rich. However, Nozick does more or less retain Rawls’ first principle of justice. Both philosophers believe that everyone in a just society deserves equal basic liberties such as the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, and the right to…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In conclusion, Rawls’ idea of the Veil of Ignorance is an interesting one. It has faults which are heavily looked at by MacIntyre and Sandel, but it is still a substantial building ground for Rawl’s ideas. It is relevant to his position and still creates and adds character to…

    • 628 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Veil Of Ignorance

    • 412 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Veil of ignorance: The exclusion of superfluous information such as age, sex, etc. allows for the determination of choice to be rendered justly and without the difference principle, which worsens the societal situation of those members who are worst off - John Rawls. Rawls’ concept of the “veil of ignorance” is a model for adopting principles of justice and was derived from an unpublished document of the same title written by Wilfried Hinsch. The concept has been submitted as a solution for equalizing people’s personal interests and doctrines as a means for allowing the political conception of justice to be successful employed.…

    • 412 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Veil Of Ignorance

    • 100 Words
    • 1 Page

    The role of the "veil of ignorance” plays in Rawls' theory of distributive justice is by eliminating bias in society making a fair way of choosing principles (Shaw & Barry, 2016). The veil is put in place so individuals from the original position would make a just decision knowing nothing of their self and their natural abilities, or their position in society. In addition the individual would know nothing of their sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes when making a decision (Shaw & Barry, 2016). Therefore, no one is at an advantage or disadvantage when making up principles in society.…

    • 100 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hayek and Rawls take different paths along their journey to reach what they believe the proper form of distributive justice would be. They both follow liberal ideology, focusing more on the individual. Hayek follows a line of thinking based on liberty, utility, and a “economic order based on the market,” and with that with that economic order comes capitalism as the most viable option for the society (Hayek, LLL p.68). Hayek believes that this society will offer the best opportunities for access to the benefits that society has to offer. Rawls takes another position on this subject, starting from the question of, “what will create the best democratic society for all” Rawls answers that question by forming an argument for justice as fairness.…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays