Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
John Rawls' theory…. In his book A Theory of Justice John Rawls offers readers a "Kantian Interpretation" of his "original position," according to an essay in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SAP). First, a review of Rawls' "original position" will set up the explanation of his Kantian link. Rawls posits (in his "original position") that in understanding his philosophy readers should imagine themselves as "…free and equal" and as willing to agree to "commit themselves to the principles of social and political justice" (SAP, p. 1). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy asserts that the "main distinguishing feature" of Rawls' "original position" is "the veil of ignorance" (SEP, p. 1). What that means is that in order to be certain there is a total "impartiality of judgment, the parties are deprived of all knowledge of their personal characteristics and social and historical circumstances" (SEP. p. 1).
In the original position (the "veil of ignorance") the parties are aware of generalized data on biology, economics, and psychology, but now they are impartial when given a list of justice conceptions and asked to choose from among several alternatives regarding the "…conception of justice that best advances their interests" (SEP).
As for Rawls he sees this experiment as producing two principles of justice: a) the first...
1). Looked at another way, Rawls actually argues that a just society can be imagined as one in which souls, prior to being born, would agree to be thrust into at birth. Their self-interest would be up for grabs because they would not know to what degree they would be successful socially or economically, but that, in Rawls' view, would be based on the "veil of ignorance."
Rawls can be described as a person who to some degree embraces a "Kantian" philosophy" -- although he believes Kant's view on justice fails to show how "moral principles express our nature" (SEP, p. 2). Rawls agrees with Kantian constructivism when Kant argues that judgments based on the actual principles of justice "are true" -- and that includes the "moral rules of justice" that are…
Works Cited
Brooks, Thom, and Freyenhagen, Fabian. (2005). The Legacy of John Rawls. New York:
Continuum International Publishing Group.
Piccard, Richard. (2003). A Theory of Justice, by John Rawls. Ohio University. Retrieved February 20, 2012, from http://www.ohio.edu/people/piccard/entropy/rawls.html.
Rorty, Richard. (2007). Pragmatism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved February
21, 2012, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/.
February 20, 2012, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/original-position/#ConObjAutOriPos
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
The question is, how does one decide which path is more beneficial? John Stuart Mill in Utilitarianism in the Philosophy of J.S. Mill, raised similar concerns when he stated: "…any, even unintentional, deviation from truth does that much toward weakening the truth-worthiness of human assertion, which is not only the principal of all present social well-being but the insufficiency of which does more than any one thing that can be named
" (Shiele, 2006) All of these are important yet they do not address the use of "the worldviews and cultural values of people of color as theoretical bases for new social work practice models" (Shiele, 2006) but instead hold the beliefs that: (1) that only White people - especially White men - have the ability and skill to develop theories and social work practice models; (2) that people of color,
The 'Debates in Political Theory' module serves as an essential component in the study of political science, inviting students to explore the rich variety of arguments that have shaped political thought throughout history. Political theory is not a fixed body of knowledge, but a dynamic field of competing ideas and perspectives. This essay will explore some of the central debates within the module, examining how they contribute to our understanding
Both of these perspectives are, from Hart's perspective, too extreme: he wants a legal theory which would be free from moral evaluations or moral commitments (unlike Finnis' approach), while remaining a descriptive theory of the practice rather than a participation in it (unlike Dworkin's approach). Hart was trying to keep a difficult middle position (Hacker, 1977-page 31). He argued that a legal theory should be constructed around the perspective
Mill believed that any act may itself be inherently moral, so long as the outcome of that action produces a benign effect. Mill believed that the most ethical act is that which produces the most good, even if the act itself is one which is traditionally considered evil. An example of utilitarian philosophy would include the killing of innocent animals to determine a cure for some infectious disease. And