Preview

John Rawl's Theory of Justice: Contribution to Solve Some Political Issues in the Philippines

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2298 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
John Rawl's Theory of Justice: Contribution to Solve Some Political Issues in the Philippines
A Theory of Justice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

A Theory of Justice

A Theory of Justice.jpg

The 1999 Harvard University Press edition

Author(s)
John Rawls

Country
United States

Language
English

Subject(s)
Political philosophy

Genre(s)
Non-fiction

Publisher
Belknap

Publication date
1971

Media type
Print

Pages
560

ISBN
0-674-00078-1

OCLC Number
41266156

Dewey Decimal
320/.01/1 21

LC Classification
JC578 .R38 1999

A Theory of Justice is a work of political philosophy and ethics by John Rawls. It was originally published in 1971 and revised in both 1975 (for the translated editions) and 1999. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls attempts to solve the problem of distributive justice (the socially just distribution of goods in a society) by utilising a variant of the familiar device of the social contract. The resultant theory is known as "Justice as Fairness", from which Rawls derives his two principles of justice: the liberty principle and the difference principle.

Contents 1 Objective
2 The “original position”
3 The First Principle of Justice
4 The Second Principle of Justice
5 Relationship to Rawls ' later work
6 Criticism
7 See also
8 References
9 Further reading

Objective[edit]

In A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues for a principled reconciliation of liberty and equality. Central to this effort is an account of the circumstances of justice, inspired by David Hume, and a fair choice situation for parties facing such circumstances, similar to some of Immanuel Kant 's views. Principles of justice are sought to guide the conduct of the parties. These parties are recognized to face moderate scarcity, and they are neither naturally altruistic nor purely egoistic. They have ends which they seek to advance, but prefer to advance them through cooperation with others on mutually acceptable terms. Rawls offers a model of a


References: The Second Principle of Justice[edit] Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, 1971, p.302; revised edition, p
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Fairness Approach: A Case Study
    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page

    John Rawls Fairness Approach: A Case Study

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    United States Pledge Of Allegiance Analysis
    • 230 Words
    • 1 Page

    United States Pledge Of Allegiance Analysis

    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
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Poverty And Incarceration: The Criminalization Of Despair By Larry Covin
    • 1775 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Poverty And Incarceration: The Criminalization Of Despair By Larry Covin

    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
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Question2 Tanieka Kargwal comments NW
    • 1846 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Question2 Tanieka Kargwal comments NW

    In this essay I will contend and try to persuade you that the origins of justice do not require both ‘selfishness’ and ‘scanty provisions’ but rather one of the two conditions is enough in order to derive justice. This is because we are able to create property rights by with one of the two present, whereas Hume argues that both, the selfishness of man and the scarce resources that we have present in the world are essential in order for justice and property rights to be derived. This is a relevant topic because it describes how our current society has been brought about and how we have developed markets and institutions within society. I will firstly define what Hume means by selfishness, confined generosity, scanty provisions and justice, and from this I will identify Hume’s viewpoint regarding the derivation of justice. It is from this establishment of Hume’s derivation, I am able to provide examples where only one of the two conditions is required to fulfil the institution of justice. I will do this by providing an example of where there is unlimited benevolence but limited external goods and where there is limited benevolence and unlimited external goods. I will look at both Hume’s viewpoint on the derivation of justice and mine from the notion of game theory—to see where payoff would be greater and hence why we see the development of justice.…

    • 1846 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Prima Facie and Rawls’ Justice Thoery
    • 615 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Prima Facie and Rawls’ Justice Thoery

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Nozick Redistribution Is Wrong
    • 1471 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Nozick Redistribution Is Wrong

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Theory Of Justice
    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages

    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,…

    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Cohen's Essay On Virtue Ethics And Utilitarianism
    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Cohen's Essay On Virtue Ethics And Utilitarianism

    1. G.A. Cohen’s “camping trip” thought experiment [see text, chap 14.6] is designed to show why socialism is more desireable than capitalism. But it also (indirectly) supports Rawls’s “Justice as Fairness” against libertarian market-driven models based on entitlement claims and property rights.…

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Week 3 Justice Theory
    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Week 3 Justice Theory

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Vs Nozick
    • 576 Words
    • 3 Pages

    John Rawls Vs Nozick

    Regarding justice in a society, both John Rawls and Robert Nozick express differing opinions on the best way to reach this. Both philosophers illustrate what they feel justice to be and offer support for their ideas in their efforts to put forth the best argument. Before being able to decide on which argument is the strongest, it is best to understand the ideas each philosopher possesses in order to compare and contrast them.…

    • 576 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Theory of Justice
    • 972 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Theory of Justice

    In A Theory of Justice, Rawls begins with the statement that, ‘‘Justice is the first virtue of social institution,’’ meaning that a good society is one structured according to principals of justice (1998). John Rawls states that when a person is covered in the veil of ignorance, a society without his/her own status known must begin in that society. They must provide a place that they could relate to for someday they may have bad luck and end up as a person on the lowest end of the ladder in society. This is one way to have a just and fair society for all to live. A place where status does not matter and no one would ever feel bad for the situation they are in.…

    • 972 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Political Conception Of Justice Analysis
    • 1123 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Political Conception Of Justice Analysis

    The primary goods will not be of equal value to every individual. Though the goods are the same (liberties, rights, opportunity etc.) the usefulness is going to be different depending on the situation of the individual. The value of any primary good is a function of the means that individual has at his disposal of making the most use of that primary good (Young and Rawls). Therefore, those with greater means will be able to make better use of their primary goods that are guaranteed for all by the conception of justice that we arrive at in the original position. Rawls then places the onus on individuals by claiming that it is up to them to align their expectations with their current situations to adequately reflect “the all-purpose means they can expect, given their present and foreseeable situation” (Rawls 189). Therefore, if an individual lacks the “all-purpose means” to secure his preferences, then it is that person’s responsibility to adjust his preferences so that he will be able to achieve realistic goals given his circumstances (Young; Rawls 189-93). This is to illustrate the fact that a conception of justice is not unjust just because citizens hold unrealistic expectations. Although this seems perfectly reasonable, it poses one problem that Rawls was trying to avoid from the outset. The expectation that citizens will…

    • 1123 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Similarities Between Nozick And John Rawls
    • 1823 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Similarities Between Nozick And John Rawls

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Vs Nozick
    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    John Rawls Vs Nozick

    Both John Rawls and Robert Nozick have made major contributions to modern political philosophy. Rawls’ most successful philosophical work, “A Theory of Justice,” has helped construct both modern liberal and social democratic concepts of social justice. On the other hand, “Anarchy, State, and Utopia”, Nozick’s most successful philosophical work, constructs a form of libertarianism traditionally associated with John Locke and other philosophers prescribed to individual rights and freedoms. Evidently, both philosophers exhibit two highly distinct political philosophies. One major difference between the two philosophies is the legitimacy of governmental redistribution of wealth. As a result, Rawls and Nozick are at two opposite ends of the political…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    A Theory Of Justice By John Rawls Analysis
    • 730 Words
    • 3 Pages

    A Theory Of Justice By John Rawls Analysis

    The principal aim of Rawls in the publication of A Theory of Justice is for a redistribution of the resources. That is, Rawls suggests the “equal distribution of resources as the desirable state and then argues that inequality can be justified only by benefits…

    • 730 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics