In A Theory of Justice, Rawls aim to justify the principles of justice as fairness by reference to individual rational choice. He grounds his view on the ideas on “society as a fair system of cooperation” and of “citizens as free and equal persons” (Rawls 1995:11). Acknowledging that people have diverse interests, the tries to answer to how they can reach an agreement in matters of justice. The conception of justice as fairness is important in order to understand the logic of principle of justice. In this hypothetical situation of equal liberty, Raws states that free and equal persons concerned to further their own interests define the fundamental terms of their association.
Furthermore, the shaming concept should be such that it provides a foundation for an inclusive debate rather than one aimed at shaming individuals. A customized adaptive response is relevant such that individual culprits develop a recovery formula for the negative behavior. Shaming can only happen when the resultant effect is bound to have a positive impact. In contrast, the best way to run a justice system should focus on behavioral changes at the top and punitive behaviors at the bottom. The state has a responsibility to maintain security for its citizens.
Rule utilitarianism is more concerned with fairness and the law. The ultimate goal is to still satisfy and benefit the most people, but only through the most just and fairest means possible. A rule utilitarian seeks to benefit the most people but through the fairest and most just means available. The Deontiological ethical theory is that of duty, coming from the Greek word 'deon '. Duty as in that we are morally obligated to act in accordance with a certain set of principles and rules regardless of outcome.
Toulmin’s model can be used to analyze any effective argument and his concepts can even help when creating one. I think that Iveson’s claim that “…the middle can, once again, seem extraordinary, magical and fabulous – the best place to be” is morally sound because this argument seeks to better society by opening our eyes to understanding points of view different from our
Some people think this code represented justice and fairness in the society which contribute to the stability and prosperity of the society. On the contrary, some people think the purpose of this code is to enhance the power of the ruling class. Both of them have their supporting facts and theories, so it is hard to decide whether the code plays a positive role in the human history or not. I choose three pieces of law form the code which represent the intension of the code in order to determine if it is inclined to justices or to governance. I analyze these law based on the indications-the apply/benefit group of people, the fairness of the law, the practice of the law.
This can be backed up by the act Utilitarianism theory which states that the rightness of an act depends solely on its consequences( Ferguson, 2015). This theory allows us to perform acts that would maximize happiness in the society. Changing barriers in the environment would result in promoting happiness and achieving better patient outcomes. Utilitarians assume that happiness consists of pleasure and the absence of pain and pleasure further includes intellectual, artistic, physical as well as sensual pleasures( Ferguson, 2015). According to the home care act, a long term care home is primarily the home of its residents and it is to be operated in a way that depicts it as a place where the residents may live with dignity and in security,safety
. At the end one could make an argument that a consensus system gives middle class citizens more enticement to partake because it creates less discouragement and enables middle class views are better represented in public policy involving human growth, taxes, and public goods. Despite the differences in each system, a consensus democracy is one that appears to have their citizen’s best interests in mind and therefore, I believe it is one that is superior to others.
The actions that have the best consequences and thus permissible can sometimes be unjust. Conscience is the decisive sanction for the principle of utility. Mill suggested that every human possesses a natural sentiment of concerning others’ welfare. When such natural sentiment is encouraged, other people’s pleasure would become our standard of moral judgment. 8 By considering the maximum happiness for maximum number of people, we are indeed attempt to place the morality assessment squarely under public observation, instead of being a matter of personal intuitions.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE SYSTEM Ashish Kumar Distributive Justice or Economic Justice or the Fair Share principle, as the name suggests, is basically concerned with the social and economic welfare of the citizens. It says that an equal society is that where there is a fair allocation of the material goods and services between all the sections of the society. John Rawls, the main theorist of Distributive Justice gives two basic principles of Fairness or Fair Share related to Distributive Justice. The Constitution of India, through Article 14, 15, 16, 38, 39, 39(A) enforces the principle of distributive justice. Distributive justice exists in a society where there exists no inequality, so the Indian constitution through these articles tries to remove the prevailing inequalities in the society.
There are multiple opinions of what justice concludes of, but for now I will only focus on the two. I will be discussing the differences between Rawls’ “A Theory of Justice” and Nozick’s “Entitlement Theory.” Not only that, I will also support why Nozick’s “Entitlement Theory” is the superior theory of Justice. Rawls’ “A Theory of Justice” is based on the idea that society cooperates with one another for mutual advantage. If society is a matter of cooperation between equals, the conditions need to be defended and any inequalities among the social positions must be justified. However, in order for the agreement to be secured, we need to eliminate any bias of the rich or the poor, or the religious and the atheist.