Justice as Fairness by John Rawls.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Justice & Economic Distribution (2)
Advertisements

Rawlsian Contract Approach Attempts to reconcile utilitarianism and intuitionism. Attempts to reconcile utilitarianism and intuitionism. Theory of distributive.
Justice as Fairness by John Rawls.
Lecture 6 John Rawls. Justifying government Question: How can the power of government be justified?
Locke.
Introduction to Ethics
PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 4.
360 Business Ethics Chapter 4. Moral facts derived from reason Reason has three properties that have bearing on moral facts understood as the outcomes.
L To distribute goods and services fairly, protecting everyone’s right to equal opportunity and bettering the lives of all members of society (liberalism:
COMP 381. Agenda  TA: Caitlyn Losee  Books and movies nominations  Team presentation signup Beginning of class End of class  Rawls and Moors.
Egalitarians View Egalitarians hold that there are no relevant differences among people that can justify unequal treatment. According to the egalitarian,
John Rawls' theory of justice ~ slide 1 John Rawls’ theory of justice zIn A Theory of Justice –1. The basis for the theory äA revised version of.
RAWLS 1 JUSTICE IS FAIRNESS. John Rawls Teachers: H. L. A. Hart Isaiah Berlin Students: Thomas Nagel Martha Nussbaum Onara O’Neill.
John Rawls, Who? GETTING TO THE ASSIGNED ARTICLE: A THEORY OF JUSTICE (1971) HOW WERE PEOPLE THINKG ABOUT ETHICS AND JUSTICE? – Utilitarian.
THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY: Bentham
Ethical Principle of Justice principle of justice –involves giving to all persons their "rights" or "desserts" –the distribution of various resources in.
What is a Just Society? What is Justice?.
Contemporary Liberalism: John Rawls: Justice as Fairness l All citizens should share in a society’s wealth and be given equal economic opportunities l.
Deontological tradition Contractualism of John Rawls Discourse ethics.
The Political Philosophers Philosophy Dr. Mark King.
Rawls John Rawls ( ): A Theory of Justice (Harvard UP, 1971) -and other books, notably Political Liberalism (1990) -and Justice as Fairness Restated.
January 20, Liberalism 2. Social Contract Theory 3. Utilitarianism and Intuitionism 4. Justice as Fairness – general conception 5. Principles.
What can we do? What should we do? RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE UNITED STATES CITIZEN.
Chapter One: Moral Reasons
BAM321 Business Ethics and Social Responsibility Session 7 Business and Management.
CRITICAL QUESTION How should the bounty of a society be distributed?
Ethics Theory and Business Practice
“To be able under all circumstances to practise five things constitutes perfect virtue; these five things are gravity, generosity of soul, sincerity, earnestness.
Ethical Theories Presentation LP 5 Melissa Sweet, Tara Guelig, Katherine Norton April 9 th,2009.
Justice & Fairness Approach LP: Ethical Theories Presentation By: Nelita, Brandon Keshia,Jennifer Section: Tuesday 5:30 April 1, 2008.
Rawls II: Another version of the social contract PHIL 2345.
Rawls on justice Michael Lacewing co.uk.
Contractualism and justice (1) Introduction to Rawls’s theory.
Rawls IV: Wrapping-up PHIL Original position, cont. of discussion Exclusion of prejudices while contracting in the OP:  'One excludes the knowledge.
CHAPTER EIGHT: SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY P H I L O S O P H Y A Text with Readings TENTH EDITION M A N U E L V E L A S Q U E Z.
John Rawls A Theory of Justice PULSE – April 16, 2013.
Rawls III: Social justice: an ahistorical account? PHIL 2345.
Ideas about Justice Three big themes Virtue Ethics Utilitarianism
Chapter One: Moral Reasons Review Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings (10 th ed.) Julie C. Van Camp, Jeffrey Olen, Vincent Barry Cengage Learning/Wadsworth.
January 20, Liberalism 2. Social Contract Theory 3. Utilitarianism and Intuitionism 4. Justice as Fairness – general conception 5. Principles.
Distributive Justice John Rawls. Which is better? MusicCheese 65.
Ethics and Morality Theory Part 3 30 January 2008.
Justice as Fairness John Rawls PHL 110: ETHICS North Central College.
Three Modern Approaches. Introduction Rawls, Nozick, and MacIntyre Rawls, Nozick, and MacIntyre Have significant new approaches Have significant new approaches.
Justice as Fairness by John Rawls. Rawls looks at justice. Kant’s ethics and Utilitarianism are about right and wrong actions. For example: Is it ethical.
Justice/Fairness Approach Learning Plan #5 Sara Deibert, Sara Roxbury, Allie Forsythe, Robert Phillips March 31,2008.
John Rawls Theory of Justice. John Rawls John Rawls (February 21, 1921 – November 24, 2002) was an American philosopher and a figure in moral and political.
Rationality in Decision Making In Law Nisigandha Bhuyan, IIMC.
DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS (CH. 2.0) © Wanda Teays. All rights reserved.
Deontological Approaches Consequences of decisions are not always the most important elements as suggested by the consequentialist approach. The way you.
Kantian Ethics Good actions have intrinsic value; actions are good if and only if they follow from a moral law that can be universalized.
WEEK 2 Justice as Fairness. A Theory of Justice (1971) Political Liberalism (1993)
Social Ethics continued Immanuel Kant John Rawls.
Philosophy 219 Rawls, A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism.
PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 4.
Deontological tradition
New Ideas about Government and Philosophy
Rawl’s Veil of Ignorance
John Rawls’ theory of justice
Rawls, A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism
State of Nature and Social Contract Theory
Rawls’ Theory of Justice
Theories of justice.
John Rawls Theory of Justice.
A Text with Readings TENTH EDITION M A N U E L V E L A S Q U E Z
Rawls, A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism
Professional Ethics (GEN301/PHI200) UNIT 3: JUSTICE AND ECONOMIC DISTRIBUTION Handout #3 CLO#3 Evaluate the relation between justice, ethics and economic.
Social and economic inequalities are arranged so that they are both:
Presentation transcript:

Justice as Fairness by John Rawls

Rawls looks at justice. Kant’s ethics and Utilitarianism are about right and wrong actions. For example: Is it ethical to lie on a job application to preserve legitimate privacy? Rawls’ theory is about distributive justice. What is the ethically correct way to distribute benefits and burdens in society?

Rawls’ theory is a version of social contract theory Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau. State of nature, law of nature, creation of civil society to improve/secure quality of life. US society rests on such social contracts. Declaration of Independence – “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people…to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station….” Constitution – “We the people…do ordain and establish….”

Contractarianism Moral or political theories based on the idea of a social contract or agreement among individuals for mutual advantage

Rawls’ Theory of Justice as Fairness

Rawls asks, “What principles of justice would people chose at the founding of society?” A hypothetical, not real, moment – but still a doable thought experiment. A moment when people know nothing about their future. Class or social status. Intelligence or other capabilities. Social place in terms of gender, race, etc. Wealth.

Rawls’ operational definition of “justice as fairness.” Think yourself back to the original position and put yourself behind the veil of ignorance. Ask yourself whether a proposed rule for distributing benefits and burdens is acceptable to you. If not, then it cannot be fair, and therefore it cannot be just – so, the rule must be rejected.

This operational procedure produces Rawls’ formal definition of “justice as fairness.” Justice = satisfying two general principles: “First: each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others.” “Second: 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’ first principle. The basic liberties for all citizens: Political liberty (right to vote and be eligible for public office). Freedom of speech and assembly. Liberty of conscience and freedom of thought. Freedom regarding your own person. Right to hold personal property. Freedom from arbitrary arrest and seizure as these are understood under the rule of law.

Rawls’ second principle. Holding positions of authority and offices of command open is clear enough. For example, no hereditary positions. No exclusions based on gender, race, etc. No “tests” based on wealth or property. Arranging social and economic inequities so that everyone benefits is less clear. However, Rawls provides the framework for thinking about this – original position and veil of ignorance.

A possible example. Proposed rule: “Women should always make less money than men.” On average women make ~75% of what men make, and this has not changed over the past 30 years. Men make more than women in the same job. So, here is an unequal distribution. Does it benefit everyone? Would you accept this rule – if you were behind the veil of ignorance?

Priorities among Rawls’ principles. The basic rights and liberties for all principle has first priority and takes precedence. This means, among other things, that you cannot justify a decrease in liberty on the basis of increased social or economic benefit.