Philosophy and Justice
Social Philosophies
A Theory of Justice by John Rawls
Quite a number of books and articles were published by John Rawls, a philosopher that held the James Bryant Conant University Professorship at Harvard University. He is, however, mainly famous for his book 'a Theory of Justice' where he attempts to define social justice. The work has tremendously impacted contemporary political views.
Rawls was discontented with the traditional philosophical claims regarding what actually makes a social institution just and regarding what justifies social or political policies and actions. The utilitarian claim maintains that societies ought to follow the greatest good for the greatest number. This claim has several issues, such that it appears to be coherent with the belief of the domination of majorities over the minorities. The intuitionist claim maintains that human beings feel what is actually right or wrong through some natural moral sense. This is actually also challenging since it basically explains justice by stating that individuals "know it when they see it," and it does not address the several conflicting human feelings. Rawls tries to develop a logical explanation of justice via the social contract approach. According to this particular approach, the society is somehow an agreement amidst all those within the society. If a society was actually an agreement,...
Moreover, how does he justify saying one would rather be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool who is satisfied? His point is obvious - it is better to have brains and not achieve happiness than be dumb and be contented. But Socrates, brilliant as he was, chose death over exile from Athens, which it can be argued did not lead to happiness in Socrates nor in the students who admired
John Stuart Mill's concept of liberty professes to be liberal but ends up with a distinctly 'non-liberal' feel when analysing the details. This paper endeavours to define exactly what Mills' notion of liberty is and how it should be regulated by studying his book "On Liberty." The main discrepancies of his theory will be highlighted so as to demonstrate the apparent contradiction between his ideology and the examples he chooses
Personal usefulness or utility is not required to clash with public usefulness. Usefulness or Utility is often misguided for pragmatism. but, pragmatism is the affinity to encourage certain preferred objective, regardless of the consideration between what is correct and reasonable. Utility is the standard level of being practical, and hence it must take into account not just what would generate a preferred objective, but what would encourage the maximum
Unfortunately, we have had no more success at finding that limit than Mill did, for what we see all around us today is that very same "political despotism" of which Mill speaks with trepidation. Mill writes that it is the "majority" who makes "the ways of mankind" (102-3), but his notion of "majority rule" appears to be based on the assumption that political despotism has not been enshrined. Majority rule
John Stuart Mill on Liberty In John Stuart Mill's brilliant 19th Century essay "On Liberty" he states that "the worth of a State, in the long run, is the worth of the individuals composing it." What Mills is purporting in that statement is that the State (the government) must not impede on the natural development of individual liberty. We are never to forget that we have inalienable rights for life and
E. herself very unhappy. Personal happiness should not be compromised for the sake of greater happiness of maximum number of people when the one person who would be most affected by your decision is you. I feel that Mill's concept is workable when rights of other people are involved. For example Katie would not be hurting anyone's rights by choosing to become a doctor. But lets consider another example. Larry
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now