John Rawls : The First Of Five Children Of William Lee Rawls And Anna Abell Stump

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.

ABSTRACT. Adapting the traditional social contract approach of earlier years to a more contemporary use, John Rawls initiated an unparaleled revitalization of social philosophy. Instead of arguing for the justification of civil authority or the form that it should take, Professor Rawls is more interested in the principles that actuate basic social institutions —he presupposes authority and instead focuses on its animation. In short, Rawls argues that “justice as fairness” should be that basic animating principle.

Rawls strive to determine how we can make a society as just as possible. Rawls derives two principles; liberty principle and the difference principle. He also gives a theoretical device that he calls “the original position” and “the veil of ignorance” this device is meant to help us in the way that we picture our self behind a veil. We do not know the basic things about ourselves like our sex, age, financial status etc. This device is to help us be totally neutral in the sense that we do not know our status in society. After putting our self in a status quo if you will, we can now decide on what us just for the whole society. Rawls derives then the difference principle. To put this is Rawls own words, the difference principle is: “Then the difference principle is a strongly egalitarian conception in the sense that unless there is a distribution that makes both persons better off an equal distribution is to be preferred

John Rawls just society was considered wrong to most. He says that if I can be pretty sure that I won't get caught and punished that it is rational for me to break the contract. He was a very selfish person and only cared about what was in the best interest for him. He states that we are rationally self-interested, argued that we need a society and social contract that applies to everyone and anyone. He also stated that for all of this "just society" to happen we need everything to end and just wipe the slate clean for a "new" beginning. For this beginning, Rawls wanted to enforce the two principles of justice. 1. Equality Principle; this principle states that everyone has maximum liberty consistent with the same liberty of all others. 2. Difference Principle; all inequalities are allowed if two conditions are met: positions of inequality are open to everyone, and the inequality benefits everyone.

Based on the article “Still Separate, Still Unequal” by Jonathan Kozol, it is clear that John Rawls’s principles are not being realized in today 's society due to a still-segregated educational system. Kozol

John Rawls was the second most important political thinker of his time. His main contribution to the idea of a civil society is his theory of justice. Rawls believed in “social primary goods” which included rights,

The answer to this question would be no. Charles Mills thinks Rawls does not address the existing inequalities due to race and social hierarchy. He believes while Rawls has an imaginary “blank state” behind the veil of ignorance that was never there. We are evolving societies that have history of white male supremacy. Mills further explains we are on a system of domination, where white males have controlled the decisions made on “what is fair.” Throughout the years, we have what Mills refers as “strategic silence” where a conversation about race, or any topic regarding inequalities are prohibited by society, so meaningful progress cannot be achieved.

John Rawls a political theorist engages in various political theories and arguments that contradict, support, and scrutinizes others theories made by other notable political theorist. Rawls contemplates usage of theories such as The Theory of Justice, Veil of Ignorance and Nozick’s Entitlement Theory which will be discussed within this analysis for their relation to society and what benefits or aliments they hold if any on society’s effective function.

In my understanding John Rawls bases his theory on the veil of ignorance. It’s an imaginative situation that puts all rational people together and lets them make decisions on the justice structure of society without being effected by power or any other influences coming from other

Rawls assumes that these hypothetical people would be conservative risk takers and in a situation of uncertainty would opt for the least disadvantageous outcome in any choice presented to them and they would choose those principles that would maximize the position of the worst off, for just in case they should be the worst off. The two principles of justice that such people choose are:- 1. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive liberty compatible with a similar liberty to others. 2. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantages b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality and opportunity.

Explain Rawls on the original position and the veil of ignorance. State Rawls’ two principles of justice. Explain why persons in the original position would choose each of the two principles.

By Characterizing his original position as the “appropriate initial status quo” what moral sensibilities does Rawl appeal to in order to advance his theory? Please

Rawls holds that an individual cannot always agree on a contract before entering a society, some are simply born in them and would then have no say over their obligated fate. Instead of Locke’s contract theory, Rawls suggests the idea of the veil of ignorance which ensures that justice will prevail. The contract, suggested by Rawls, is created in a hypothetical situation where individuals gather together in representation of all who have and will live. These individuals have not recollection of divisions such as status, class, resources, abilities, goals, or even their own psychology. This memory swipe or veil of ignorance ensures the exclusion of bias and the pursuit of personal gain. In the final agreement, all have the same views and opinions because everything that separates one individual from another has been washed away fro the sake of the common good for all

Furthermore, they have no concept of social standing or economic standing. The individuals are just capable of reasoning and possess the goal of creating a just society (Rawls 1971, 17). The purpose of the veil is to allow those in the original position to agree on rules pertaining to their own mutual interests. Rawls thinks that behind the veil of ignorance, free of bias with rational thought, the individuals would agree to a society governed by his two principles of justice (Rawls 1971, 53). Individuals would agree to these principles because it would be the only way to ensure a fair initial status quo in society (Rawls 1971, 53). This is important because it allows for justified inequalities later that will be regulated instead of unjust inequalities. No one would want to make things unequal from the start because they have no way of knowing their actual place in society behind the veil (Rawls 1971, 11). For example, if someone suggested that all UCR students get free tuition at the cost of students at other universities footing the bill, it would be within the individuals best interest to disagree because he has no way of knowing if he is a UCR student in the society or one of the other university students that now have to pay more. The idea of the original position is that a just society would be fair and equal, and individuals behind the veil of ignorance would agree on Rawls’ two principles of justice to make it so.

Rawls claims that if people did not know their place in society they would follow through with his theory and eradicate all so called injustices that lead to an uneven distribution of wealth. Human beings will always pick the option, which allows them to have to largest possible gains, not one where everyone is on an even playing field. Beings would not place themselves in the lowest of the low; they wouldn’t assume themselves to be “those in need”. Competition seems to be completely ignored by Rawls, we are driven by