Environmental Ethics

In his ideal society, “an injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even greater injustice.” Rawls wished to create a system of “justice as fairness” that would be based in equality and justice. This system of “justice as fairness” he claimed began with choosing a “conception of justice that is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions.” This “conception of justice” is then, ideally, used as the basis on which an institution would build its constitution, legislature, and so forth.

The general concept of Rawls “original position” is that all social “Primary Good” should be distributed equally to individuals in a society, unless an unequal distribution favors those less fortunate. Rawls call “the situation of ignorance about your own place in society the “original position (242).” Rawls’ theory is in direct response to John Lock’s principles on social contract which states that people in a free society need to set rules on how to live with one another in peace. Rawls’ principles were designed to guards against injustices, which was inflicted upon society, with the help of John Stuart Mills Utilitarianism principle that individuals should act so as to maximize the greatest good for the greatest number. Mills

The distributive justice theory of John Rawls concerns justice as fairness. In his theory, Rawls defines justice as demanding equality, unless inequality makes the least advantaged person better off. Rawls proposes two major principles of justice: (1) that each person should have the same equal right to basic liberties and (2) that social and economic inequalities are attached to positions and offices open to all under equality of opportunity and are to the benefit of the least advantaged group of society. This theory is determined by a social contract that assumes there is a natural state on which people will agree based on moral equality. In this social contract, all members wear a veil of ignorance through which they do not know anything about their own

In John Rawls' A Theory of Justice, he argues that morally, society should be constructed politically as if we were all behind a veil of ignorance; that is, the rules and precepts of society should be constructed as if we had no prior knowledge of our future wealth, talents, and social status, and could be placed in any other person's societal position (Velasquez, 2008). Through this, Rawls believes that people will create a system of “justice as fairness” because their lack of knowledge regarding who they are will prevent them from arranging a society that would benefit those in their position at the expense of others.

These are the people not being heard by the higher powers. Rawls identifies two principles for the topic of justice. The first being that each individual should have the same rights to the liberties consistent with other people experiencing the same liberties. The second being that inequalities should be arranged so that they would be to everyone’s advantage. With these two principles, Rawls's concept of justice would be to give more attention to those born with fewer resources to achieve success socioeconomically. This type of justice is valuable because it gives the less fortunate a chance to be at the same level as a privileged person. The term justice can mean enabling any person to realize their full potential inside of their society despite certain attributes, disabilities, sexual orientation, gender, races, religions, and any other belief or culture. Everyone should be allowed equal opportunities so that they can have the chance to find their place in their community—whether they decide to be proactive or not. Giving

John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.

Probably, many of us feel that our societies are a little or sometimes completely unjust. However, it is hard to explain our sense of justice (or equality) to the authority that in a way that sounds rational and not huffish. That is why we need John Rawls. He is an American philosopher of the twentieth-century who provided us a model that is reveal what is truly unfair and how we can correct is. He was born in Maryland in the USA in 1921. The tragedy of the Second World War, the shocking poverty and his brothers’ death made him responded to injustices of the world from his early childhood. All this experiences inspired him to go to a college because he wanted to use the power of ideas to change the unjust world into equal. The publication

If society were in agreement, Rawls asks, what kind of arrangement would everyone agree to? He states that the contract is a purely hypothetical one: If no one knew what place he or she would have in society? Then what sort of society would they choose? He argued in a fair society there would be justice based on the theory that justice is tied to fairness; politically he thought this to be a conceivable notion. Up until this everyone wanted to maximise their position based on how much wealth they could obtain. There was no theory of justice as fairness before this... The biggest property class at that time was slavery; the major concerns for the people were how to protect their property and to guard against the abolishment of slavery. Under the constitutional convention people already knew what position they were entering into to. He called this the original position; Rawls maintains that the choice would be for a social structure that would best benefit the unknowing chooser if she or he happened to end up in the least desirable position... After considering the main characteristics of justice as fairness Rawls looks at the principles of justice. He identifies two principles: One, that each person should have equal rights, two, that inequalities should be arranged so that they would be to everyone’s advantage and arranged so that nobody would be denied access from

Rawls has an idea called the “justice as fairness.” He believes that if you place people in a situation that is fair among all the people and they take all relevant information into account, then the ideas they would agree to are also fair. According to Rawls, the original position is crucial to the justice of fairness because it is designed to be a fair and impartial point of view. In taking up this point of view, people are to imagine themselves in the position of free and equal people who agree upon and commit themselves to principles of social and political justice. The main aspect of the original position is the veil of ignorance. It’s job is to take away the person’s knowledge of particular facts about themselves, such as sex, class, race, and ethnicity, that they could use to their advantage or that could be used against them, if put in a certain economic position. The parties have to have some form of knowledge, though, so they are allowed general facts. Things such as people and societies, including knowledge of the laws and economics, psychology, political science, and biology and other natural sciences. Rawls argues that if a person doesn’t know if they will suffer or benefit from society, they will choose the best possible option of the best possible outcome. This all leads back to justice as fairness and the idea that people put in a fair situation will choose fair ideas, also. (Theory of Justice,

To achieve a just society, Rawls believes in two principles. The first principle states that each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. The second principle is that social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a)reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and b) attached to positions and offices open to all (Rawls, 60).

John Rawls' "A Theory of Justice" has long been revered as a marvel of modern political philosophy. It's most well-known for the two principles of justice outlined by Rawls: (1) that all persons have an equal right to liberty; and (2) that (a) all inequalities in society should be arranged to benefit the least advantages, and (b) that all positions and offices should be open and accessible as outlined by fair equality of opportunity. Rawls' conception of society, as a "co-operative venture for mutual gain", forms the basis for both principles, and he is at all times concerned with creating a stable concept of fair and just society. Rawls' second principle, dealing with distributive justice and equality

Thus, we return to the first order intellectual tool: principles of justice. There are many possible principles of justice; however Rawls tests the following two principles of justice in hopes which are theoretically capable of achieving institutional reform. The first principle of justice is that “each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic rights and liberties” (5). Moreover, this is the translating of rights into real possibilities to guarantee that one really does have freedom. And this is a fair and concrete value which society does, in theory, guarantees. The second principle of justice is that “social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: first they are to be attached to positions and offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society,” (6). Thus, there is no exclusion of any group.

John Rawls discusses the original position in his book A Theory of Justice. “The Original Position and Justification” is a chapter where Rawls persuades his readers into taking the original position seriously. The original position is a position where people are equal and are rational in order to make principles that they live by fair. However, there is a problem with rational decisions being biased, where people will choose principles to benefit themselves. Therefore, the veil of ignorance will restrict a person’s knowledge about social status, intelligence, gender, race, ethnicity, and temperament. This will then define principles of justice that will not be advantage or a disadvantage to anyone in a society. Keeping this in mind, the purpose of this essay is to explain the reasons Rawls gives to favor the original position. I will then oppose to Rawls argument with two of my own reasons about the veil of ignorance not being realistic and the equal of human beings not being plausible.

In A Theory of Justice John Rawls presents his argument for justice and inequality. Rawls theorizes that in the original position, a hypothetical state where people reason without bias, they would agree to live in a society based on two principles of justice (Rawls 1971, 4). These two principles of justice are named the first and second principles. The first is the equal rights and liberties principle. The second is a combination of the difference principle and the fair equality of opportunity principle, or FEOP (Rawls 1971, 53). Rawls argues that inequality will always be inevitable in any society (Rawls 1971, 7). For example, there will always be a varied distribution of social and economic advantages. Some people will be wealthier than

John Rawls was an American political and moral philosopher. Rawls attempts to determine the principles of social justice. In this essay, I will elucidate John Rawls’ views on forming a social contract, the counter-arguments against Rawls’ theory and finally the state of debate on the counter-arguments. John Rawls set out on his discussion on justice and fairness in his book A Theory of Justice 1971. Rawls theory describes a society with free citizens holding equal basic rights regardless of the social status (poor or rich). Each society has its way of attempting to bring about equality in its political and economic systems. The tenets of distributive justice, therefore, act as an ethical guide to the