Academic Philo Quick Notes Thread: John Rawls: Theory of Justice -Attempts to explain why clear social inequalities are unjust and what a just society really is -both a work of ethics and politics -Rawls attempted to address the problem of distributive justice -Appears to be a moral contractarian -Theory of justice is in itself a kind of "social contract" A just society is: -with characteristics that conform to normative rules -Everyone would agree on them fundamental principle - "every individual is inviolable" Implications: 1. Life should not be sacrificed for the sake of the majority i.e suppressing the people's right to speech and expression for the sake of economic growth directly attacks consequentialist ethics (utilitarianism) 2. An erroneous theory is tolerable in the absence of a good one -an unjust law is better than no law at all; an act of injustice is tolerable ⟷ necessary to avoid a greater act of injustice i.e it might be morally right to incapacitate if not to kill a notorious a serial killer to stop him from killing more people 3. individual liberties should be restricted to maintain equality of opportunity -restrictions through law preserves freedom in democracy i.e it is probably morally right to restrict people from owning more than five hectares of an agricultural lot so that other people will have the chance to own a lot
Justice as Fairness First principle Equal Liberty Principle -emphasis on equal access to the basic human needs rights and liberties -guarantees the right of each person to have the extensive basic Liberty compatible with the liberty of others i.e right to vote, right to speech, the right to peaceable assembly Second principle Difference Principle -emphasizes the idea of fair equality of opportunity and the equal distribution of socio-economic inequalities -this principle implies that social and economic positions are: a) to everyone's advantage b) open to all
Theoretical veil of ignorance "All players in the social game would be placed in a hypothetical situation called the "original position"
-each individual does not know her sex, race, natural abilities, social status, economic conditions, and the like (individual's hidden identity - behind the veil of ignorance) individual sets aside her biases towards and preconceptions about anything note: Edmund Husserl Epoche (phenomonological reduction) -out of this veil of ignorance: a) each individual makes a rational prudential choice this concerns the kind of social institution they would enter into contract with
Conclusion original position ➽ individuals agree on specific social rules and institutions veil of ignorance ➽ individuals choose the basic structure of society that they think is just a) justice as fairness is achieved through the notions of the original position and the veil of ignorance b) if everybody in the original position promotes equality then justice as fairness is attained c) if inequality is upheld then injustice prevails ➽Selfish but rational people who are w/o concrete identity and context will freely choose to create a just society ➽via veil of ignorance individuals can identify beliefs about how society should be organized
I’ve often wondered if the Rawlsian view of the good is a kind of individualism. Each person decides for themselves given the starting perimeters. But what if their initial view of the good is mistaken?
Yes, Dr. Anderson. In fact, some critics of Rawls argued that his theory of justice is leaning towards individualism. And, indeed, morality is jeopardized if the initial view of the good is mistaken.
Academic Philo Quick Notes Thread:
John Rawls: Theory of Justice
-Attempts to explain why clear social inequalities are unjust and what a just society really is
-both a work of ethics and politics
-Rawls attempted to address the problem
of distributive justice
-Appears to be a moral contractarian
-Theory of justice is in
itself a kind of "social contract"
A just society is:
-with characteristics that conform to
normative rules
-Everyone would agree on them
fundamental principle - "every individual is inviolable"
Implications:
1. Life should not be sacrificed for
the sake of the majority
i.e suppressing the people's right to speech
and expression for the sake of economic
growth
directly attacks consequentialist ethics (utilitarianism)
2. An erroneous theory is
tolerable in the absence of a good one
-an unjust law is better than no law at all;
an act of injustice is tolerable ⟷ necessary
to avoid a greater act of injustice
i.e it might be morally right to
incapacitate if not to kill a notorious
a serial killer to stop him from killing more
people
3. individual liberties should be restricted
to maintain equality of opportunity
-restrictions through law preserves
freedom in democracy
i.e it is probably morally right to restrict people from owning more than five
hectares of an agricultural lot so that other people will have the chance to own
a lot
Justice as Fairness
First principle
Equal Liberty Principle
-emphasis on equal access
to the basic human needs rights and
liberties
-guarantees the right of each person to
have the extensive basic Liberty
compatible with the liberty of others
i.e right to vote, right to speech, the right to peaceable assembly
Second principle
Difference Principle
-emphasizes the idea
of fair equality of opportunity and the
equal distribution of socio-economic
inequalities
-this principle implies that social and economic
positions are:
a) to everyone's advantage
b) open to all
Theoretical veil of ignorance
"All players in the
social game would be placed in a
hypothetical situation called the
"original position"
-each individual does not know
her sex, race, natural abilities, social
status, economic conditions, and the like
(individual's hidden identity - behind
the veil of ignorance)
individual sets aside her biases towards and
preconceptions about anything
note: Edmund Husserl Epoche (phenomonological reduction)
-out of this veil of ignorance:
a) each individual makes a
rational prudential choice
this concerns the kind of social institution they
would enter into contract with
Conclusion
original position ➽ individuals agree on specific social
rules and institutions
veil of ignorance ➽ individuals choose the
basic structure of society that they think is just
a) justice as fairness is achieved through the
notions of the original position and the
veil of ignorance
b) if everybody in the original position promotes
equality then justice as fairness is
attained
c) if inequality is upheld then
injustice prevails
➽Selfish but rational people who are
w/o concrete identity and context will
freely choose to create a just society
➽via veil of ignorance individuals can identify
beliefs about how society should be organized
thanks
@@PHILOnotes thank you for the detailed and easy to understand discussion!
This is far better than any video on Rawls omg thank you
Thank you so much for your very inspiring comments, Francis. Cheers!
Totally agree. This was my 6th video today had to save it as it made more sense
Thank you for these very clear and concise presentations!
No worries, Mystical Realist. We are delighted to know you found this video helpful. Cheers!
I’ve often wondered if the Rawlsian view of the good is a kind of individualism. Each person decides for themselves given the starting perimeters. But what if their initial view of the good is mistaken?
Yes, Dr. Anderson. In fact, some critics of Rawls argued that his theory of justice is leaning towards individualism. And, indeed, morality is jeopardized if the initial view of the good is mistaken.
great tolearn about Rawls
your knowledge is wonderful
Thank you so much! This has helped me so much with the reading. Actual life saver!
Glad it helps, C Orue. Cheers!
Brilliant Channel! Thank you very much
No worries, Sneha. Thanks too for your sweet and very inspiring comments. Cheers!
Thank you, mam, great teachings
love this tysm admin for this clear information ♡
You're so welcome!
thanks!
Also make a video on comparison bewtween Plato and Aristotle system of justice
sure, soon
You replied after 2 months
Excellent channel!
thanks, mate!
This video is amazing
Many thanks for your very inspiring comments, Simon! Cheers!
Very interesting video ♥! As a fellow RUclipsr, I am always looking for new ideas! Nice Job!
Thank you so much, Walking Dead Now! I wish you all the best!
@@PHILOnotes You're Welcome!
Can someone give simplified elaboration on criticisms to Rawl's theory of justice by C.B MacPherson,Communitarians and Feminists
Is me criticism bhi include hai kya?? Plz bta do🙏🏻🙏🏻
hmmm...
great video! tysm!!
Thanks too, Zoe. Best wishes!
Excellent !
Many thanks, Blaise. Best wishes!
I love ur channel
@Cathyy Escaro thank you very much! 😊
Why say her instead of their or one’s?
Yeah, next time we will follow your suggestion. Thanks Zachary.
@@PHILOnotes you got it dude
You may view our compilation of video lectures in Ethics here: ruclips.net/video/ScvJfxSuYB4/видео.html
Great
Love from Pakistan,keep it up
@Jamil Khan thank you! :)
Great guy ❤🙏🌈🌿🎈
am I the only one who hears barking in the background? no? just me? ok
yeah
Who else can hear barking in the background at around 5:30?
Yeah, hehe. We are living in a middle of a farm in a tropical country.
@@PHILOnotes nice
INDIVIDUALS not INDIVIDULS
ok, thanks
👍
thanks Kezziah!