Rawls Theory of Justice Essay

A contemporary philosopher, fast cardinal Rawls (1921-2002), is n mavind for his contri unlessions to semipolitical and moral philosophy. In particular, Rawls discussion about arbiter introduced five important concepts into discourse, including the devil prescripts of evaluator, the fender lay out and conceal of ignorance. Rawls just about(prenominal) famous work is, A Theory of Justice (1971) gives an introduction to this carcass of thought and he emphasises the importance justice has on rangeing and organising a clubho aim.The problem arises by defining what the term means theoretically. One of two definitions raft be utilise, the first being definition establish on ones sexual morality or lack thereof. This merit theory of justice uses merit to decide how an single(a) of the confederacy will be treated based on the contri howeverion to the hunting lodge. The new(prenominal)wisewise is the need theory of justice where is it simulated every individual s hould help those in need or who atomic number 18 less privileged.Attempting to balance the demands posed by these rival theories, Rawls maintained that in comp atomic number 18ities in union gouge hardly be justified if they produce increase benefits for the entire orderliness and only if those previously the most disadvantaged functionings of society atomic number 18 no worse off as a proceeds of any in tintity. An inequality, then, is justified if it contributes to affectionate utility, as the merit theory asserts. But, at the identical time, Rawls argued, anteriority essential be given to the needs of the to the lowest degree(prenominal) advantaged, as the needs theory asserts.Thus, antitheticalial rewards argon allowed to the advantaged members of society but not because of any merit on their part. No, these rewards are tolerated because they provide an inducement for the advantaged which ultimately will prove beneficial to society (e. g. , taxing the advantaged with the polish of redistributing the wealth to provide for the to the lowest degree advantaged). Original Stand Using the skipper position and experimental thought where agents shadow veil of ignorance choose principles to ordinate society.Rawls argued that two principles serve to organize society, the independence principle and the disparity principle. He rooted the archetype position in and widen the concept of social find previously espoused by Hobbes, Rousseau, and Locke which made the principles of justice the object of the centralise binding members of society together. In addition, Rawls advocacy of treating people only as ends and never as means rooted his philosophical speculations in and extended Kants categorical imperative.According to Rawls a society is a judge between free and equal members for the purpose of mutual advantage. Cooperation among members makes life part because cooperation increases the stock of what it is rational for members of society to desire irrespective of whatever else its members whitethorn want. Rawls calls these desires primary goods which include among others health, rights, income, and the social bases of self-respect. Rawls noted that there would be inequality when deciding how the burden would be shared amongst the people.Rawls responded to this challenge by invoking the master key position, in which representative members of a society would determine the answers to these difficult questions. That is, rattlepated any g everywherenment, the representatives would rationally discuss what sort of political sympathies will be supported by a social fill which will earn justice among all members of society. The purpose for this discourse would not be to unloosen controlmental authority but to identify the staple fibre principles that would govern society when government is established.The chief task of these representatives would not be to protect individual rights but to promote the welfare of soci ety (1971, p. 199). To this end, the representatives do not go throughare veiled fromwhich place in society they will occupy. In addition, every factor which skill bias a decision (e. g. , ones tastes, preferences, talents, handicaps, conception of the good) is kept from the representatives. They do, however, give acquaintance of those factors which will not bias ones decision (e. g. , social knowledge, scientific knowledge, knowledge identifying what human beings need to live).From this original position and shrouded by a veil of ignorance about their place in society, Rawls argued the representatives ultimately would select the principle of justice quite a than other principles (e. g. , axio system of logical virtues, natural law, utilitarian principles) to organize and govern society. While individual members of society oftentimes do act in their self- avocation, this does not mean that they cannot be rational about their self-interests. Rawls argued that this is precisely w hat would pass along in the original position when the representatives engaged from behind the veil of ignorance.Freed from focusing upon ones self-interest to the exclusion of others self-interests, the society which the representatives would design determines what will sink to its members and how important social matters like discipline, health care, welfare, and line of products opportunities will be distributed throughout society. The idea is that the representatives direct from behind the veil of ignorance would design a society that is fair for all of its members because no individual member would be willing to risk ending up in an intoler adapted position that one had created for others but had no intention of being in oneself.Rawls claimed that the representatives to the original position would invoke the principle of rational choice, the so-called maximin decision govern. This rule pronounces that an agent, when confronted with a choice between alternative states o f the world with from apiece one state containing a range of possible outcomes, would choose the state of affairs where the shell outcome is that state of affairs which is punter than the worst outcome presented by any other alternative. Rawls practice session of two persons sharing a valet de chambre of cake demonstrates how the maximin decision rule works in actual practice. sound off there is one piece of cake that two persons want to eat. They equally desire to eat the cake and each wants the biggest piece possible. To deal with this dilemma, twain agree that one will cut the cake while the other will choose one of the two pieces. The consensus derived guarantees that the cake will be shared fairly, equating justice with fairness. Two Principles of Justice The first is the indecorousness principle that states that each member of society has an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal raw material liberties compatible with a analogous system of equal liberty for all.Accordingly, each member of society should experience an equal guarantee to as many different liberties? and as oftentimes of those liberties? as can be guaranteed to every member of society. The liberties Rawls discussed include political liberty (the right to vote and to be eligible for public office) granting immunity of speech and assembly liberty of conscience and independence of thought freedom of the person along with the right to hold personal property and, freedom from arbitrary arrest and seizure.In contrast to some(a) libertarian interpretations of utilitarianism, Rawls did not promote absolute or complete liberty which would allow members of society to nurture or to hang in absolutely anything. The difference principle requires that all economic inequalities be arranged so that they are both a) to the benefit of the least advantaged and b) attached to offices and positions open to all members under conditions of fair equality of chance.If this is to occ ur, Rawls argued, each generation should preserve the gains of culture and civilization, and maintain intact those just institutions that see been established in addition to putting aside in each period of time a suitable amount of real jacket accumulation. Rawls is willing to tolerate inequalities in society but only if they are arranged so that an inequality rattling assists the least advantaged members of society and that the inequalities are connected to positions, offices, or jobs that each member has an equal opportunity to attain.In the fall in States, this scheme is oftentimes called equal opportunity. The inequalities Rawls discussed include inequalities in the distribution of income and wealth as well as inequalities imposed by institutions that use differences in authority and resRawls is willing to tolerate inequalities in society but only if they are arranged so that any inequality actually assists the least advantaged members of society and that the inequalities are connected to positions, offices, or jobs that each member has an equal opportunity to attain.In the United States, this scheme is oftentimes called equal opportunity. The inequalities Rawls discussed include inequalities in the distribution of income and wealth as well as inequalities imposed by institutions that use differences in authority and responsibility or chains of command. The solid ground the representatives in the original position and operating from behind the veil of ignorance would agree upon the difference principle is not due to the origination of a social contract but to ethics. That is, members of society do not deserve either their natural abilities or their place in a social hierarchy.Where and when one was born and the privileges and assets afforded by ones kin is a matter of sheer luck. It would be unfair, Rawls contended, were those born into the least advantaged of society to remain in that place if all members of society could do better by abandonin g (or redistributing) initial differences. According to Rawls, this is what ethics? according to the standard of justice? demands and, in the United States, this is the basis of what is oftentimes called affirmative action. The representatives would agree.The liberty principle must always take precedence to the difference principle so that every member of society is assured of equal basic liberties. Similarly, the bit part of the difference principle cited above (b) must take priority to the first part (a) so that the conditions of fair equality of opportunity are overly guaranteed for everyone (1971, p. 162). Thus, the two principles of justice, the liberty principle and the difference principle, are coherent because society cannot justify a decrease in liberty by increasing any members social and economic advantage.Reflecting Rawls interest in political philosophy, the liberty and principle and the difference principle apply to the basic structure of society (what might be cal led a macro instruction view)? societys fundamental political and economic arrangements? rather than to particular conduct by governmental officials or individual laws (what might be called a micro view). The liberty principle requires society to provide each citizen with a fully adequate scheme of basic liberties (e. g. , freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, and due process of law).The difference principle requires that inequalities in wealth and social position be arranged so as to benefit societys most disadvantaged group. In cases where the two principles conflict, Rawls argues the liberty principle must always take precedence over the difference principle. One sample that applies Rawls theory of justice involves how one would live on a lawyer in the society designed by the representatives in the original position and operating from behind the veil of ignorance. This example also indicates how and why inequalities would exist in that society.In the original position and operating from behind the veil of ignorance, representatives organize society to be governed according to the liberty principle and the difference principle. In that society, any member of society can become a lawyer if one possesses the talent. So, a boyish cleaning woman discovers that she possesses the talent and interest to become a lawyer and decides that this is what she wants to do in her life. But, to get the education she actually needs to become a lawyer requires an inequality.That is, less fortunate people must help pay for her education at the public universitys law school with their taxes. In return, however, this young woman will perform some very important functions for other people? including the less fortunate? once she becomes a lawyer. At the same time, however, the lawyer will make a consider of money. But, she is free to keep it because she has earned it. At the same time, she will also pay taxes to the government which, in turn, will be used to provide n eeded programs for the least advantaged members of society.The issue of equitable pay also provides a practical example that clarifies how Rawls theory of justice can be applied (Maclagan, 1998, pp. 96-97). Noting that the principle equal pay for equal work is eminently fair in concept, Maclagan notes that not all work is equal. What is really needed in society is some rational basis to compare what sometimes are very different occupations and jobs, especially when this involves comparing mens work and womens work. Typically, the criteria used to compare dissimilar jobs quantifies work requirements as well as the enthronisation individuals must make to attain these positions.In addition, the amount of skill and instruction required, the potential for danger and threat to ones life, the disagreeableness involved in the work, as well as the degree of responsibility associated with a job all figure prominently when making such calculations. In actual practice, however, making compar isons between dissimilar jobs is an immensely difficult undertaking, as Maclagan notes, citing as an example the difficulties management and labor both confront in the process of collective talk terms.Collective bargaining involves ethics because each party declares what the other ought to do. When these differences are resolved through a consensus, a contract provides the basic structure by which the members of that society (called the corporation) will organize and govern themselves for a specific period of time. Coming to agreement upon a contractlike Rawls concept of reflective equilibriumrequires both parties to the collective bargaining process to align their principles and intuitions through the process of considered dialogue and mutual judgment.Furthermore, the contract? like Rawls difference principle? tolerates inequalities in pay but only as long as the least advantaged enjoy equal opportunity and their situation is protected if not improved. What is noteworthy about Mac lagans example is that the parties are not in the original position nor do they operate from behind a veil of ignorance. Instead, they have to move toward those positions if they are to go down their differences amicably and for the benefit of both. The criticsSince its first publication in 1971, Rawls work has reliable some begrudging if not respectful criticism. Some have asked which members of society embed the least advantaged? For his part, Rawls identified these people generally as unskilled workers and those whose honest income is less than the median income. What Rawls failed to address, however, is the plight of those who may be the truly least advantaged members of society, namely, those citizens of some permanently unemployed underclass, who depend entirely upon government largess to subsist (e. g. welfare), or whose racial or ethnic origins condemn them to permanent disadvantage. The critics ask Should not their plight be considered more important than those who po ssess more of societys benefits? Furthermore, in so far as Rawls states the difference principle, it appears that inequalities are permissible but only if they better the lot of the least advantaged members of society. However, critics note, that position is inconsistent with Rawls claim that the representatives to the original position must not take an interest in anyones particular interests.The logic fails if preference must be given by those in the original position to the least advantaged. Lastly, Rawls critique of utilitarianism, his embrace of egalitarianism, and the actual effects of the difference principle combine in such a way that his philosophy can be construed to advocate political agenda with Marxist overtones. That is, in actual practice Rawls theory would redistribute societys benefits outside from the haves to the have nots with little or no concomitant bearing of societys burdens.Economists, for example, note that Rawls has neglected to consider the market forces unleashed in a capitalist society where seeking ones self-interest is arguably the primary motivating principle. These critics argue that even the least advantaged, if they so choose, can take advantage of the minimal benefits society offers them by virtue of citizenship. by dint of education, persistence, and hard work, the least advantaged (or, their children in the next generation) will be able to participate more fully in enjoying the benefits as well as in bearing the burdens of membership in society.The critics ask Is this not what has happened to waves of immigrants to the United States during the past two hundred years? In light of these criticisms, Rawls circumscribed the principles of liberty and difference. Pondering the question of social stability, Rawls considered how a society arranged by the two principles of liberty and difference might endure. In governmental Liberalism (1996), Rawls introduced the idea that stability can be found in an coincide consensus bet ween citizens who hold diverse religious and philosophical views or conceptions about what constitutes the good to be sought.As with Maclagans (1998) collective bargaining example, this coincide consensus is found in their agreement that justice is best defined as fairness. In Justice as Fairness (2001), Rawls introduced the idea of public reason, that is, the reason possessed by all citizens which contributes to social stability, a notion he first detailed in The Law of Peoples with The Idea of Public occasion Revisited (1999).