Rawls' ideas if incorporated into society would not compel any person to contribute to the greater good any more than he or she desired; they would simply impose mechanisms for distributing resources and potential rewards in the most socially beneficial and equitable manner. Industries that produce socially beneficial products and services that contribute to the greater good would be permitted to profit more from those endeavors than superfluous industries; physicians would be entitled to sufficient compensation and benefits to ensure against any shortage of physicians in society; and police officers and firefighters would earn more than professional athletes, although closer to several times the average wage in society instead of the equivalent of hundreds or even a thousand times the salary of the average person.
Finally, one of the most beneficial aspects of Rawls' ideas is that the primacy of his first principle over the second provides the same function as constitutional rights that currently protect fundamental rights of the individual, in many cases, as exceptions to the other provisions of statutory law.
Potential Problems with the Rawls Approach:
To a certain extent, Rawls' ideas have a component that is uncomfortably close to Marxism despite the fact that they do not prohibit private ownership of business production. Moreover, it could stifle creativity in a manner that reduces initiative to succeed. Likewise, it presumes that nothing beneficial ever comes from apparently superfluous industries and could limit the production of many types of products and services that derive from industries that do not serve the public good more directly.
Another possible criticism of Rawls' approach is that it may be somewhat simplistic. Instead of prohibiting profits above a certain level for industries that do not benefit society enough directly to justify large profits, it might make much more sense to allow them to purchase "superfluous industry credits" in the same manner that environmental efforts have produced a cap and trade carbon...
Rawls sets out to propose a new theory, which he does by formulating two principles and "to show that the two principles of justice provide a better understanding of the claims of freedom and equality in a democratic society than the first principles associated with the traditional doctrines of utilitarianism, with perfectionism, or with institutionalism" (Rawls, Political Liberalism 292). Nozick suggests an entitlement theory of justice that might seem to reflect
Rawls and the Just Society Today's United States society is not just because it violates both principles of John Rawls' theory of justice based on the "original position." This paper will explain Rawls' principles and show how the U.S. violates those principles. Rawls states that justice is fairness (MacKinnon, Fiala, 2015, p. 78) within the framework of the social contract, which stems back to Rousseau (2012, p. 1), who ironically pointed out
All organizations and business have some form of ethical culture to carry out their goals, which cannot be inconsistent with the aims of utilitarianism. All organizations aim at the pleasure of achieving or creating something. This line of thought can be strictly infused into the awareness of employees during meetings or seminars. The goals of the theory may also be infused into new employees as part of their orientation.
Justice in Society According to Rawls and Hampshire This is paper contrasting the political philosophies of Rawls and Hampshire according o their views in 'Political liberalism' the Law of Peoples' and 'Justice as Conflict'. 4 sources are given. Very few alternatives to the prevalent utilitarianism, dominant in most of the Western world, have emerged and made any significant impact. The theories of John Rawls however have made an important contribution to political
Justice and Good The concept of what justice is and what constitutes a good life vary from jurist to jurist and thinker to thinker. HLA Hart is one of the most well-known jurists to come up with a concept of law that was widely acclaimed but was aggressively challenged as well. In hid masterpiece, The Concept of Law, Hart recognizes the legal system as the "combination of primary rules of obligation
John Rawls / Mencius John Rawls's A Theory of Justice is concerned with distributive rather than retributive justice: there is precious little discussion of crime and punishment in Rawls's magnum opus, but plenty of discussion about equality and fairness. Rawls seems to be embarked on a Kantian ethical project of establishing universal principles, but his chief concern is to establish his principles without requiring, as Kant does, an appeal to God
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