John Rawls Theory Of Justice

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,
Cohen argues that as a requirement of justice, people must be compensated for their misfortunes that are not derived from choice. Rawls is seen as inconsistent in his theory, as he seems to appeal to the distinction between choice and circumstance, yet his Difference Principle undermines it. However, Rawls never intended for his statements about morally arbitrary factors to have this kind significance. His intention was to provide a clear workable set of principles that could actually be applied in a democratic society. This focus on choice and circumstance distinction is impossible and distracts from what Rawls was attempting to achieve. Rawls realized that natural variances are inevitable but the Difference Principle allows for differences in natural endowments to work to the benefit of all in society. He did not attempt to eliminate the influence that morally arbitrary factors have on distributive shares because by providing people with the social bases of self-respect, the Difference Principle makes it possible to pursue diverse conceptions of the good. Rawls’ theory should be understood as an attempt to devise the most reasonable solutions that could be applied in a
The thought experiment offers a way of deducing just principles that free and rational persons would choose if they were not able to know what position they would occupy in life. The principles are chosen behind a veil of ignorance that prevents the participants from knowing particular information about themselves. Rawls believes this would lead to fair results as participants are unable to choose principles that they can profit from. Rawls argues that the rational persons, behind the veil of ignorance, would give priority to the Liberty Principle which means that "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all". Participants would choose a second principle which stipulates that social and economic inequalities are justifiable if they satisfy two conditions: they are arranged so that they are both to the greatest possible benefit of the least advantaged, which is known as the Difference Principle; and that positions and offices are open to all under the conditions of fair equality of