Justice Is Superior

767 Words4 Pages
What kind of Justice is Superior? Justice is the most important political value and applies to the institution of society. Institutions regulate the market, property, family, freedom etc. It defines the just behavior or treatment of the people. 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
…show more content…
“ They distinguish between those aspects of the social system that define and secure the equal liberties of citizenship and those that specify and establish social and economic inequalities.” (p.8). Basically, the interests to be distributed by justice are only those that we can assume everyone will want such as liberties, opportunities, wealth, rights, income etc. The principle of equal liberty is for “each person to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with similar liberty for others” (p.7). For example providing incentives which will generate more wealth for everyone.The difference principle is the “social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and attached to positions and offices open to all”(p.7). For example the freedom of speech and personal property. Rawls’ argues that Liberty is more important than the distribution of social and economic inequalities. Principles of justice designate the benefits so that way the people can claim the benefits. We could object that justice is served when people receive what they have a right to. We could argue, for instance, that people have a right to what they need or deserve. A different theory, which bases justice on rights and liberty, is that of Robert…show more content…
Nozick claims that whether a distribution is just or not depends entirely on how it came about. An object that is justly owned if it was originally acquired justly and always transferred justly. The individual is authorized to the resources they possess either through the first, second or third principle. The first principle, Justice in Acquisition, specifies how unowned things can come by owned justify. The second principle, Justice to Transfer, specifies how justly owned things can be transferred justly. For example exchanging gifts. The third principle, Justice in Rectification, says what to do about unjust acquisitions and unjust
Open Document