Preview

Rawls' Maximin Principle

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1478 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Rawls' Maximin Principle
Rawls' Maximin Principle: Is It Really The Most Rational Solution?

Political philosophy aims to reflect the normative and conceptual dimensions of political life. American philosopher John Rawls is widely recognized as one of the leading political philosophers of the twentieth century. His A Theory of Justice (1971) is one of the primary texts in political philosophy and proposes two principles of justice. The first, the liberty principle, defines basic liberties and the second, the difference principle, regulates disparity within rights, powers, and privileges through what is known as a maximin strategy . The difference principle and underlying maximin strategy, as any theory, has several credible components as well as some that cause for criticism.

Rawls argues that the most reasonable principles of justice are those everyone would accept and agree to from a fair position. These principles determine a society's basic structure; political constitution, economy, and property rules. Rawls takes a fair agreement situation to be one where everyone is impartially situated as equals. In this so-called "original position" everyone is equally situated by a hypothetical "veil of ignorance". This veil requires individuals to set aside their knowledge of their particular differences, including knowledge of their talents, wealth, social position, and religious views. People in the original position are rational; they desire a set of primary goods and they know and understand general laws and principles that govern a society . Rawls asserts that in the hypothetical original position everyone would unanimously accept justice as fairness. This conception of justice consists mainly of two principles, the second of which is most imperative and will be discussed in great detail. Rawls's second principle of justice, the difference principle, defines the limits of inequalities in wealth, income, powers, and positions that may exist in a just society. It says first,

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

    The United States Pledge of Allegiance is an honorable and commendable mantra. It concludes with, “one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.” Justice in the former reference is inclusive for everyone, an entitlement, granted upon birth. John Rawls position of justice is that “everyone should be treated equally and as fair as possible”. Mr. Rawls position parallels the Egalitarian theory of equality and mutual respect. This isn’t necessarily the practice because contrary to the hope for multiple factors are factored in to the outcome.…

    • 230 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The difference principle is the assertion that inequality can only be tolerated if the worst off person in society benefits from that inequality. This is referring to inequality of wealth or goods that develops…

    • 1770 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    | Justice is the principle that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association. Greatest benefit to the least advantaged.…

    • 4727 Words
    • 19 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Good Essays

    I also think that Rawls’s theory of justice is a good one. But I doubt if this can be applied in reality. As everyone in our society has his/her own role or position. For example, I am a student, and you are a professor. As a student, I always want to do less work and have good grades; while as a professor, you would like students to study hard. So when come to the decision of what is justice, we will have different opinions. Same as when governor or some authorities define the concept of justice, they will have their own version of justice. As long as we people live in a society, we will have different status, and this will definitely affect our idea of justice and the regulation to govern the society. I also doubt if we really have the original position or how to realize this position. As long as people are conscious, they are always remember or know who they are and what they do and their position in the society, unless they lose their memories. Even the most fair person we believe cannot totally ignore his/her position when…

    • 615 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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…

    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    (1) What does Rawls mean by "the original position . . . under the veil of ignorance" and how does this serve as the basis for his theory of justice? (2) What are his two principles of justice? Explain the two principles.
(3) Offer a brief critical evaluation of his theory of justice.…

    • 629 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    These two political theorists have very contrasting notions of justice in a procedural sense. John Rawls believed that justice is based upon the fairness of the process, for all, and that not outcome justifies evil means. Justice as fairness is the main theme throughout his work, Machiavelli, on the other hand, argued that the means are immaterial when the outcome benefits the ruler. Justice is based upon the absolute rule of the Prince. Death Note depicts many of the theories that these two theorists had. There is a narrative of a lack of procedural justice and whether it is justified to attain world peace. The two main characters have contradictory views of justice and spend most of the series mentally and philosophically battling each other.…

    • 1145 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    From the moment of publication of “A Theory of Justice” in 1971, John Rawls is considered having worked out a thorough theory of social justice with his “justice as fairness” principle. In his work, Rawls presents two basic principles of justice that he considers to be the foundation of our society. The first principle states that everyone has the same exact rights and freedoms as anyone else. The term…

    • 1038 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rawls had these two ideas. One idea was that all should be equal. All should have the same rights. The second idea was if there are any inequalities, everyone should benefit from them in the society. Still to this day, philosophers stand with these ideas of Rawls.…

    • 448 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Week 3 Justice Theory

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Rawls believes the utilitarian view does not place the necessary emphasis on individuals, and though he agrees with many aspects of contractarianism, he wishes to improve beyond the classic versions of the social contract (Jurik, 2016, p. 7). Consequently, he endeavors to advance the concept of utilitarianism, and marry it with the social contract theory through his inclusions of the “veil of ignorance” perspective and the “difference principle”. Rawls’ terms his overall advancement as, “justice as fairness” (Rawls, 1993, p.48). In his 1993 article, Justice as Fairness, Rawls claims, “justice as fairness, I would now understand as a reasonable, systematic and practicable conception of justice for a constitutional democracy, a conception that offers an alternative to the dominant utilitarianism of our tradition of political thought” (p.…

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Ethical Reasoning

    • 2266 Words
    • 10 Pages

    This has led many to define justice in such a way that it includes the obligation to narrow the inequities between rich and poor. This has been done in a number of ways. One approach, like Nozick's, does not focus on equality of results, the actual distribution of society's goods, but on equality of opportunity. Unlike Nozick's, however, it recognizes that many are impeded in their ability to participate in the life of society and share in its benefits by factors that, while they may not be the result of discrimination or malfeasance, still are not chosen or deserved by the subjects. This includes inequality in natural gifts, family background, education and so on. This view recognizes that society has the obligation, to the extent that it is able, to help compensate for these inequalities. Thus society would have an obligation to provide compensatory education, job training, health care, day care and so on, so that those who start out deprived will at least have a chance to compete for decent jobs, housing and so on. This definition still tolerates large discrepancies in the actual distribution of goods, but at least it recognizes some form of social obligation to help those most disadvantaged.…

    • 2266 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Vs Nozick

    • 576 Words
    • 3 Pages

    John Rawls argues that the principles of justice that govern the basic structure of society are the principles that would be agreed upon in a hypothetical fair bargaining position, which he calls “the original position.” Throughout his writing, Rawls describes the original position and conveys how it would lead to agreement on two principles of justice. The first principle that he describes says 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. The second principle requires that social and economic inequalities must exist only if they are to everyone’s advantage and attached to positions that are open to everyone under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.…

    • 576 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Unjust and Unfair Society

    • 585 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Rawls theory goes up against utilitarianism. Utilitarianism argues that justice is that which brings the most happiness or goodness to the biggest amount of people. Rawls had two purposes for his justice theory. They were to define the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens and provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society. A right would be something a person has such as, the right to free speech or the right to practice a religion. These rights can be considered benefits. Rawls says that justice entails providing a way of assigning rights and duties in basic institutions. The way we provide these rights are through voting. Rawls values a system that creates a fair and just society without bias towards those who have a big say in creating it.…

    • 585 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays