ipl-logo

John Rawlss: The Most Just Theory Of Justice

1036 Words5 Pages

The most just Theory of Justice
The answers to the question “What is justice?” are various and it is very difficult to agree on one answer. John Rawls, an American liberal philosopher, aimed to find a universal answer to this question that everybody would agree on (Pierik, 2015b). He assumes that it is possible to find a mutual answer by employing his social contract method when everybody would be hypothetically put into an equal position. What is the answer emerging from such a situation and how is it applicable to real-life topics such as the transnational clinical trials? In this essay, it is argued that to achieve a truly fair conception of justice that could be applied to social and economic structure of society is only possible from the initial position of equality that ensures a complete dissociation from any knowledge about personal position in the society. Such a conception of justice leads to a just society that equally distributes the benefits of every member of such a community (Rawls, 1999: 3-19).
This essay first elaborates on Rawls’s understanding of justice. The next part addresses why and how the veil of ignorance is crucial for the original position of equality and the importance of difference-principle emerging from this position. Finally, the third part briefly covers the relation between of transnational clinical trials and Rawls’s theory of justice
Rawls understands justice as “the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of Letter From Birmingham Jail

    689 Words  | 3 Pages

    [3]In a thought experiment proposed by philosopher John Rawls, individuals are asked to imagine designing a just society under a veil of ignorance, a concept urging people to prioritize fairness and equality since they can't predict whether their social structures will advantage or disadvantage them. Similarly, [4]Dr. King stresses a fair and harmonious society in his "Letter from Birmingham Jail," except that he focuses on solving existing problems rather than creating a whole new society. The most fundamental difference between Dr. King and John Rawls is that Dr. King confronts a real problem that exists in a real society. In contrast, John Rawls only proposes a theoretical solution.

    Read More

  • John Rawls Philosophy

    901 Words  | 4 Pages

    In this kind of fair society, decisions and social acts will be made without bias or predisposed advantage of a group of people against others. Rawls’ experiment makes us think deeper and objectively which kind of society we would think just. When a political decision is made, we should try to use the veil of ignorance in order to see how fair this measure

    Read More

  • The Life And Legacy Of Robert Gould Shaw

    775 Words  | 4 Pages

    Rawls’ idea of justice as fairness, which he presented in his book, “A Theory of Justice,” emphasizes the importance of equal opportunities and equal distribution of wealth and resources in society. This idea resonates with me because, as someone who values fairness and equality, I believe that everyone should have the same chance to succeed and live a fulfilling life. Rawls’ work has taught me to be more aware of societal inequalities and to work towards creating a fairer and more just

    Read More

  • Famine Affluence And Morality Analysis

    1790 Words  | 8 Pages

    This approach says that a society is in some sense is an agreement amount all those who make up the society. In the analogy Rawls shows his disagrements and gives solutions or what he things is a more just way of doing such things. Rawls starts off by saying “I believe that the contrast between the contract view and utilitarianism remains essentially the same in all these cases. There fore I shall compare justice as fairness with familiar variants of intuitionism, perfectionism, and utilitarianism in order to bring out the underlying difference in the simplest way.” Rawls strongly opposes utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • John Rawls Theory Of Justice Research Paper

    758 Words  | 4 Pages

    A theory however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue” (Rawls Theory of Justice). Justice is an immutable character that cannot be transferred or withheld from certain people, not even for the sake of the “greater good.” Each individual has a right to justice as much as they do to air; it is a basic principle of being alive. If our institutions and laws, though sworn to uphold and protect justice, violate our innate rights, then they must be overturned to service the needs of justice over politics. Our government, specifically our legislative branch, was built to preserve the quality of justice in our country and to protect the rights of the people.

    Read More

  • John Rawls Vs Nozick

    568 Words  | 3 Pages

    John Rawls and Robert Nozick are well known as the most eminent political philosophers of the U.S in the late twentieth century. Both of them have had their views of justice and are reviewed and explained as follows: Rawls did a work in 1971 and was about A Theory of Justice. This was his major work that he did, and it greatly assisted to shape a social justice concept, which is social democratic and liberal. He provided a theory that represented an alternative to utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • John Rawls's View Of Social Justice In Society

    1290 Words  | 6 Pages

    The claim that rational individuals behind a veil of ignorance would choose the greatest possible equality has been challenged as arbitrary and unverifiable. Rational individuals might well choose a social structure with large rewards for the majority of people and small rewards for the minority on the grounds that one is more likely to end up as part of a majority than a minority. Moreover, the veil of ignorance of where one will be in a society also takes away all knowledge of what one will do. Legal justice is generally considered a matter of appropriate responses to actions: In the version offered by Rawls, justice is detached from anything that anyone has done and thus may have nothing to do with any idea of what people

    Read More

  • Egalitarianism In Obamacare

    1048 Words  | 5 Pages

    In our society, people are either born rich and powerful, having the rights and opportunities that those who are born into lower-class would not have. So why should we live in a government system where we allow these inequities to happen? In Justice, Michael J. Sandel discusses John Rawls’ arguments over defining a just society. Rawls believes that “we should reject the contention that the ordering of institution is always defective because the distribution of natural talents and the contingencies of social circumstance are unjust, and this injustice must inevitably carry over to human arrangements. Occasionally this reflection is offered as an excuse for ignoring injustice, as if refusal to acquiesce in injustice is on par with being unable to accept death.

    Read More

  • John Bordley Rawls: A Theory Of Justice

    1453 Words  | 6 Pages

    Rawls holds that Justice cannot come from utilitarianism since the doctrine is consistent with undesirable form of government whereby a greater happiness of the majority is achieves though pure negligence of the minority. In 1999, Rawls published the Law of Peoples which is the principle focus of this thesis which explicates and expound in depth “the political conception of right and justice in relation to international relations and its applications.” From his childhood experience of the discrimination of the children, Rawls argues that “justice consist in the basic principles of the government that free and rational individuals would agree to in the hypothetical situation of

    Read More

  • Hobbes Vs Rawls Analysis

    1591 Words  | 7 Pages

    Political theorists, whether they are realists, or liberalists, over the centuries, have come into conflict over what they believe to be the utmost important task of the state. Hobbes believes the most important task of the state is to ensure law and order, rooting his argument in the idea of a sovereign ruler. On the other hand, Rawls, a modern theorist, firmly believes that a state should focus on realising justice within their society. While a utopian society cannot be achieved by either of these theories, I will highlight why Rawls was right in his assumption that the main focus of a state should be to ensure justice for all within their nation, through analysing and comparing the conflicting arguments of Hobbes and Rawls.

    Read More

  • Analyzing Rawls Two Concepts Of Rules

    1102 Words  | 5 Pages

    If punishment can be shown to promote effectively the interest of society, then it is justifiable, otherwise it is not. Seeing as the main characteristic of Utilitarianism is to maximize utility (i.e happiness/good), it consequently follows that punishment should be applied when it leads to improved overall circumstances in a given situation. One main argument for punishment in the Utilitarian view, is that of the deterrent effect it has, hence, threatening potential offenders in order to discourage them from breaking the law. This places the practice of punishment under strictly preventative and deterrent means. In light of this, Rawls points to the shortcomings and common criticisms of the Utilitarian model for justifying punishment.

    Read More

  • Bourdieu's Theory Of Justice '

    2464 Words  | 10 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Thomas Hobbes A Theory Of Justice

    1937 Words  | 8 Pages

    He outlines two different principles for justice as fairness, the liberty principal and the difference principal. Although many philosophers discredit Rawls’ principles, his writing has begun a renewed, lively dialogue about civil

    Read More

  • John Rawls: The Benefits Of Natural Talents

    913 Words  | 4 Pages

    John Rawls believed that if certain individuals had natural talents, they did not always deserve the benefits that came with having these abilities. Instead, Rawls proposed, these inherent advantages should be used to benefit others. Although Rawls makes an excellent argument on why this should be the case, not all philosophers agreed with his reasoning, especially Robert Nozick. Nozick believed in distributing benefits in a fair manner in accordance with the Entitlement Theory, which has three subsections: Just Acquisition, Just Transfer and Just Rectification.

    Read More

  • Equality Of Resources Dworkin Analysis

    1083 Words  | 5 Pages

    Discussant Piece Equality of Resources by Ronald Dworkin in Sovereign Virtue The discussion in the class began from taking into account the two theories of equality as provided by Ronald Dworkin in his work i.e. Equality of Welfare and Equality of Resources. But before we discuss equality, it is also necessary to talk about the inequality which usually arises out of the choices made or because of the circumstances. Thus, Dworkin’s theories of equality consider the inequality of any kind and works on the general notion of ‘Equal treatment’.

    Read More

More about John Rawlss: The Most Just Theory Of Justice

Open Document