Philosophical thought John Rawls




1 philosophical thought

1.1 theory of justice

1.1.1 principles of justice


1.2 political liberalism
1.3 law of peoples





philosophical thought

rawls published 3 main books. first, theory of justice, focused on distributive justice , attempted reconcile competing claims of values of freedom , equality. second, political liberalism, addressed question of how citizens divided intractable religious , philosophical disagreements come endorse constitutional democratic regime. third, law of peoples, focused on issue of global justice.


a theory of justice

rawls s first work, published in 1971, aimed resolve seemingly competing claims of freedom , equality. shape rawls s resolution took, however, not of balancing act compromised or weakened moral claim of 1 value compared other. rather, intent show notions of freedom , equality integrated seamless unity called justice fairness. explaining proper perspective should take when thinking justice, rawls hoped show supposed conflict between freedom , equality illusory.


rawls s theory of justice (1971) includes thought experiment called original position . intuition motivating employment this: enterprise of political philosophy benefited specification of correct standpoint person should take in or thinking justice. when think mean state of affairs obtain between persons, eliminate features (such hair or eye color, height, race, etc.) , fixate upon others. rawls s original position meant encode of our intuitions features relevant, , irrelevant, purposes of deliberating justice.


the original position rawls hypothetical scenario in group of persons set task of reaching agreement kind of political , economic structure want society, occupy. each individual, however, deliberates behind veil of ignorance : each lacks knowledge, example, of or gender, race, age, intelligence, wealth, skills, education , religion. thing given member knows in possession of basic capacities necessary , willfully participate in enduring system of mutual cooperation; each knows can member of society.


rawls posits 2 basic capacities individuals know possess. first individuals know have capacity form, pursue, , revise conception of good, or life plan. sort of conception of is, however, individual not yet know. may be, example, religious or secular, @ start, individual in original position not know which. second, each individual understands him or herself have capacity develop sense of justice , effective desire abide it. knowing these 2 features of themselves, group deliberate in order design social structure, during each person seek or maximal advantage. idea proposals ordinarily think of unjust – such blacks or women should not allowed hold public office – not proposed, in rawls original position, because irrational propose them, reason simple, 1 not know whether himself woman or black person. position expressed in maximin principle, according in system of ignorance 1 s status, 1 strive improve position of worst off, because might find himself in position.


rawls develops original position modeling it, in respects @ least, after initial situations of various social contract thinkers came before him, including thomas hobbes, john locke , jean-jacques rousseau. (each social contractarian constructs his/her initial situation differently, having in mind unique political morality s/he intends thought experiment generate.) iain king has suggested original position draws on rawls experiences in post-war japan, army challenged designing new social , political authorities country, while imagining away had gone before.


in social justice processes, each person on makes decisions features of persons consider , ignore. rawls s aspiration have created thought experiment whereby version of process carried completion, illuminating correct standpoint person should take in or thinking justice. if has succeeded, original position thought experiment may function full specification of moral standpoint should attempt achieve when deliberating social justice.


in setting out theory, rawls described method 1 of reflective equilibrium , concept has since been used in other areas of philosophy. reflective equilibrium achieved mutually adjusting 1 s general principles , 1 s considered judgements on particular cases, bring 2 line 1 another.


principles of justice

rawls derives 2 principles of justice original position. first of these liberty principle, establishes equal basic liberties citizens. basic liberty entails (familiar in liberal tradition) freedoms of conscience, association , expression democratic rights; rawls includes personal property right, defended in terms of moral capacities , self-respect, rather appeal natural right of self-ownership (this distinguishes rawls s account classical liberalism of john locke , libertarianism of robert nozick).


rawls argues second principle of equality agreed upon guarantee liberties represent meaningful options in society , ensure distributive justice. example, formal guarantees of political voice , freedom of assembly of little real worth desperately poor , marginalized in society. demanding have same effective opportunities in life offend liberties supposedly being equalized. nonetheless, want ensure @ least fair worth of our liberties: wherever 1 ends in society, 1 wants life worth living, enough effective freedom pursue personal goals. participants moved affirm two-part second principle comprising fair equality of opportunity , famous (and controversial) difference principle. second principle ensures comparable talents , motivation face similar life chances , inequalities in society work benefit of least advantaged.


rawls held these principles of justice apply basic structure of fundamental social institutions (such judiciary, economic structure , political constitution), qualification has been source of controversy , constructive debate (see work of gerald cohen).


rawls further argued these principles lexically ordered award priority basic liberties on more equality-oriented demands of second principle. has been topic of debate among moral , political philosophers.


finally, rawls took approach applying in first instance called well-ordered society ... designed advance of members , regulated public conception of justice . in respect, understood justice fairness contribution ideal theory , determination of principles characterize well-ordered society under favorable circumstances . recent work in political philosophy has asked justice fairness might dictate (or indeed, whether useful @ all) problems of partial compliance under nonideal theory .


political liberalism

in political liberalism (1993), rawls turned towards question of political legitimacy in context of intractable philosophical, religious, , moral disagreement amongst citizens regarding human good. such disagreement, insisted, reasonable – result of free exercise of human rationality under conditions of open enquiry , free conscience liberal state designed safeguard. question of legitimacy in face of reasonable disagreement urgent rawls because own justification of justice fairness relied upon kantian conception of human can reasonably rejected. if political conception offered in theory of justice can shown invoking controversial conception of human flourishing, unclear how liberal state ordered according possibly legitimate.


the intuition animating seemingly new concern no different guiding idea of theory of justice, namely fundamental charter of society must rely on principles, arguments , reasons cannot reasonably rejected citizens lives limited social, legal, , political circumscriptions. in other words, legitimacy of law contingent upon justification being impossible reasonably reject. old insight took on new shape, however, when rawls realized application must extend deep justification of justice fairness itself, had presented in terms of reasonably rejectable (kantian) conception of human flourishing free development of autonomous moral agency.


the core of political liberalism, accordingly, insistence that, in order retain legitimacy, liberal state must commit ideal of public reason . means citizens in public capacity must engage 1 in terms of reasons status reasons shared between them. political reasoning, then, proceed purely in terms of public reasons . example: supreme court justice deliberating on whether or not denial homosexuals of ability marry constitutes violation of 14th amendment s equal protection clause may not advert religious convictions on matter, may take account argument same-sex household provides sub-optimal conditions child s development. because reasons based upon interpretation of sacred text non-public (their force reasons relies upon faith commitments can reasonably rejected), whereas reasons rely upon value of providing children environments in may develop optimally public reasons – status reasons draws upon no deep, controversial conception of human flourishing.


rawls held duty of civility – duty of citizens offer 1 reasons mutually understood reasons – applies within called public political forum . forum extends upper reaches of government – example supreme legislative , judicial bodies of society – way down deliberations of citizen deciding whom vote in state legislatures or how vote in public referenda. campaigning politicians should also, believed, refrain pandering non-public religious or moral convictions of constituencies.


the ideal of public reason secures dominance of public political values – freedom, equality, , fairness – serve foundation of liberal state. justification of these values? since such justification draw upon deep (religious or moral) metaphysical commitments reasonably rejectable, rawls held public political values may justified privately individual citizens. public liberal political conception , attendant values may , affirmed publicly (in judicial opinions , presidential addresses, example) deep justifications not. task of justification falls rawls called reasonable comprehensive doctrines , citizens subscribe them. reasonable catholic justify liberal values 1 way, reasonable muslim another, , reasonable secular citizen yet way. 1 may illustrate rawls s idea using venn diagram: public political values shared space upon overlap numerous reasonable comprehensive doctrines. rawls s account of stability presented in theory of justice detailed portrait of compatibility of 1 – kantian – comprehensive doctrine justice fairness. hope similar accounts may presented many other comprehensive doctrines. rawls s famous notion of overlapping consensus .


such consensus exclude doctrines, namely, unreasonable , , 1 may wonder rawls has such doctrines. unreasonable comprehensive doctrine unreasonable in sense incompatible duty of civility. way of saying unreasonable doctrine incompatible fundamental political values liberal theory of justice designed safeguard – freedom, equality , fairness. 1 answer question of rawls has such doctrines – nothing. 1 thing, liberal state cannot justify individuals (such religious fundamentalists) hold such doctrines, because such justification – has been noted – proceed in terms of controversial moral or religious commitments excluded public political forum. but, more importantly, goal of rawlsian project determine whether or not liberal conception of political legitimacy internally coherent, , project carried out specification of sorts of reasons persons committed liberal values permitted use in dialogue, deliberations , arguments 1 political matters. rawlsian project has goal exclusion of concern justifying liberal values not committed – or @ least open – them. rawls s concern whether or not idea of political legitimacy fleshed out in terms of duty of civility , mutual justification can serve viable form of public discourse in face of religious , moral pluralism of modern democratic society, not justifying conception of political legitimacy in first place.


rawls modified principles of justice follows (with first principle having priority on second, , first half of second having priority on latter half):



these principles subtly modified principles in theory. first principle reads equal claim instead of equal right , , replaces phrase system of basic liberties adequate scheme of equal basic rights , liberties . 2 parts of second principle switched, difference principle becomes latter of three.


the law of peoples

although there passing comments on international affairs in theory of justice, wasn t until late in career rawls formulated comprehensive theory of international politics publication of law of peoples. claimed there well-ordered peoples either liberal or decent . rawls argued legitimacy of liberal international order contingent on tolerating decent peoples, differ liberal peoples, among other ways, in might have state religions , deny adherents of minority faiths right hold positions of power within state, , might organize political participation via consultation hierarchies rather elections. however, no well-ordered peoples may violate human rights or behave in externally aggressive manner. peoples fail meet criteria of liberal or decent peoples referred outlaw states , societies burdened unfavourable conditions or benevolent absolutisms depending on particular failings. such peoples not have right mutual respect , toleration possessed liberal , decent peoples.


rawls s views on global distributive justice expressed in work surprised many of fellow egalitarian liberals. example, charles beitz had written study argued application of rawls s difference principles globally. rawls denied principles should applied, partly on grounds states, unlike citizens, self-sufficient in cooperative enterprises constitute domestic societies. although rawls recognized aid should given governments unable protect human rights economic reasons, claimed purpose aid not achieve eventual state of global equality, rather ensure these societies maintain liberal or decent political institutions. argued, among other things, continuing give aid indefinitely see nations industrious populations subsidize idle populations , create moral hazard problem governments spend irresponsibly in knowledge bailed out nations had spent responsibly.


rawls s discussion of non-ideal theory, on other hand, included condemnation of bombing civilians , of american bombing of german , japanese cities in world war ii, discussions of immigration , nuclear proliferation. detailed here ideal of statesman, political leader looks next generation , promotes international harmony, in face of significant domestic pressure act otherwise. rawls controversially claimed violations of human rights can legitimize military intervention in violating states, though expressed hope such societies induced reform peacefully example of liberal , decent peoples.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Memorial Series Board Lutfuddaulah Oriental Research Institute

Weak verbs Proto-Germanic grammar

History Anthrax