Quick presentation on the week 6 reading of Rawls

1. Rawls Theory of Justice
Online at: http://www.slideshare.net/hughbar/
Background (from Stanford Encylopedia)

Son of a lawyer (clearly affected style and
approach, 'case law' can feed back into higher
principles: reflective equilibrium)

Involved in war (fragility/capriciousness of fate:
see also Nussbaum)

2. Defining Features

Loosens tie beween moral and political, freer to argue and do
'society creation'

Like Plato, concerned with trying for 'justice'

Coherentist: (with evolving viewpoint) reflective equilbrium
following (internal?) debate

(according to him, but not to Nagel) Somewhat Kantian
(categorical imperative), 'big' general motor (the principles) to
power the rest

Contract-based, the 'original position' (but is this a 'virtual
contract' or thought experiment, sidesteps some criticims)

3. Defining Features 2

Optimistic:

Assumes rationality of individuals

Assumes inbuilt sense of justice of individuals
(I think, or just rationality)

Utopian (society/world building like Plato)

Wants to be 'optimal' (utilitarianism allows
inequalities/suffering in context of maximal
'happiness', see minimax:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimax)

4. Notes on Primary Reading 1
§1

Justice is the first virtue

But, immediately anti utilitarian/anti-'intuitionism'

Public conception justice motor of well-ordered human
association

Coordination, efficiency, flexiblity also necessary

Legal oration, to some extent

5. Notes on Primary Reading 2
§2

Social justice only (political, economic, social, this is
one of the 'controversies')

No reason to argue for all cases (private societies,
international cases later)

Start with ideal theory (Kantian), used to deal later
with detail problems

In principle, no pleonexia, anywhere in system even if
of benefit (anti-utilitarian, improve not invade)

6. Notes on Primary Reading 3
§3,4,11

Original position (the virtual contract)

Veil of Ignorance (thought experiment for the
'rational' to choose 'their' society)

Two principles arranged lexically

Not dealt with in detail, since this is bulk of the
Rawls lecture notes

7. Notes on Primary Reading 4

§24: Veil of ignorance, except of 'general facts about society'
(another difficulty, how much 'ignorance'?)

Justice should generate its own support (bootstrapping)

§25: Mutually disinterested rationality (sounds a bit like Ayn
Rand!)

§26

8. Criticisms 1

(IMO) Looser tie with ethics etc. I find that OK and sensible

Difference principle: Lots of people (well, philosophers) argue about
this, for example maximal inequality for minimal but slight
'improvement' (for example: current society? The Sheep Look Up)

Arguing sensibly about existing societies: Same problems as lots of
'contracts'

Neo-Platonists (!) Philosopher kings not included, some kind of
democracy is pre-baked into this

Nozick: Property rights not included, base freedoms abandoned at
outset (therefore, for him: probably unambitious and maximal)

Hayek: Doesn't believe in social justice at all (well what do you
expect)

Wolfe/economists etc. Granularity of share: assumed individual
persons

9. Criticisms 2

Are the natural and social primary goods OK? (Maslow?)

Mathematical arguments in §26 muddy the idea of justice

What are just institutions? (governance: consider the PACs,
superPACs and super-delegates in the US, for example)

Following Wolfe et al. Granularity of society, families, private
groups etc.

In general, value of community is ignored, about individuals

Supposing 'intuitionism' is 'right' (my pick)

Choice, birth and circumstance (key parts of advantage and
disadvantage

10. Reward !
Congratulations: You have reached the end of
this, Easter Eggs:
https://youtu.be/BaRx52OD8IY