John Rawls Welfare Liberalism

Decent Essays
For years, philosophers have debated social justice. Because everyone has their own opinion on what makes something justifiable, many different forms of justice have been proposed. In this essay, I will analyze John Rawls’s welfare liberalism. First, I will review Rawls’s “original position.” Then, I will review the veil of ignorance. After that, I will review the two principles of justice (the liberty principle and the difference principle) and give examples of each. I will continue the paper with examining how Robert Nozick’s idea of justice is an objection to Rawls’s welfare liberalism. Finally, I will conclude with an overall assessment that Rawls’s welfare liberalism is a good form of justice. For John Rawls’s, justice is fairness. Pondering…show more content…
Critics of Rawls’s theory of justice believe the government should not play a role in distribution because it violates people’s resources away from them and giving them to someone less fortunate. One of Rawls’s most famous critics was Robert Nozick. Nozick’s belief was the entitlement theory. In the entitlement theory, Nozick covers justice in two principles of holdings. The first principle is the original acquisition of holdings, which deals with people owning their possessions. The second major principle is the transfer of holdings, which deals with how possessions are voluntarily or involuntarily transferred between people. Nozick believes that people only acquire things if they acquire them themselves or are given to them. Through original acquisition and transfer, attainment is just in most cases. For example, a charity could justly receive a large donation from a charitable owner; however, a thief could not justly steal something from someone. Unlike Rawls, Nozick believes this is the same in the case of taxes. Nozick is for people voluntarily donating their money hospitals, but he is against people being taxed to fund hospitals. He believes a person’s money is their property and their property alone, and it is unjust for anyone else to have a say in how it is used. Because of this belief, Nozick sees inequality as something right that just happens in contrast to Rawls who tries to limit inequality for the better of society. Nozick’s entitlement theory, which focuses on the individual, offers a stark contrast to Rawls’s theory of justice, which focuses on
Get Access