1) Distributive justice concerns how goods in society such as rights, liberties, opportunities, and income should be distributed. There are several approaches to distributive justice including equality, need, desert, and John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness.
2) Robert Nozick argued that justice in distribution is historical and depends on how property was originally acquired and transferred through voluntary exchange. He believed justice involves respecting individual rights and that redistribution violates self-ownership.
3) Debates around distributive justice center on balancing considerations such as equality, liberty, responsibility, incentives, and social cooperation. There are disagreements around what principles best characterize a just distribution of goods in society.
Equality and justice are related but distinct concepts. Equality refers to treating all people the same, while justice considers fairness and individual circumstances and outcomes. True justice cannot be achieved through equality alone. Different cultures understand justice in varying ways based on their shared history and beliefs. Key debates around justice include whether it stems from divine commands, natural law, human design, or a balance of consequences. Theories of justice also consider how to distribute goods fairly in a society.
Justice refers to fairness and equality under the law. It is a complex concept with various understandings and definitions. The document discusses definitions of justice, types of justice including distributive, compensatory, retributive, and social justice. It also examines the criminal justice system as consisting of five pillars - law enforcement, prosecution, judiciary, corrections, and community involvement - working together to investigate crimes, prosecute offenders, and rehabilitate criminals.
Distributive justice involves how benefits and burdens in society should be distributed. It addresses questions like how income, wealth, and opportunities should be distributed among individuals and groups. There are various theories for the basis of distribution, such as equality, merit, free market transactions, or maximizing individual needs. John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness holds that social and economic inequalities are justified only if they benefit the least advantaged and positions are open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
Theories of Justice (John Rawls and Amartya Sen)AnshikaBaghel1
John Rawls and Amartya Sen proposed influential theories of justice. [1] Rawls argued for a "veil of ignorance" where people in an "original position" wouldn't know their status and would choose principles for a just society. [2] Sen criticized Rawls' approach and argued justice involves comparative evaluation of institutions based on an independent spectator. [3] Both philosophers aimed to define justice, though they disagreed on methodology.
John Rawls proposed a theory of justice based on two principles that he believed rational individuals would choose from behind a "veil of ignorance". The first principle guarantees equal basic liberties for all, while the second, or "difference principle", allows inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls believed his principles combined elements of both deontological and utilitarian ethical theories to establish a fair distribution of rights and resources in a just society.
This document discusses concepts related to justice and morality. It begins by summarizing Harold Hall's wrongful conviction and release after 19 years in prison due to post-conviction DNA evidence proving his innocence. It then defines concepts of justice such as fairness, equality, and impartiality. It examines Aristotle's views on rectificatory and distributive justice. It outlines major components of justice recognized today, including distributive and corrective justice. It also discusses theories of distributive justice, criticisms of Rawls' theory, and examples related to healthcare reform, economic inequality protests, and criminal justice cases.
The document discusses John Rawls' theory of justice, which argues that a just social contract can only exist if people make decisions from behind a "veil of ignorance" without knowing their status or position. It examines how Rawls believes liberty and equality should be the two fundamental principles of justice. Several appendices are included that provide examples intended to illustrate injustices in modern society and ways in which Rawls' principles are not fully realized.
This document discusses several theories of justice, including Rawls' theory of a just society based on principles chosen from behind a "veil of ignorance" where people's talents and positions are unknown. It also summarizes Nozick's entitlement theory of a minimal state and contrasts this with Rawls' end-result principles. The document concludes by outlining Sen's capabilities approach focusing on basic functions and Nussbaum's capabilities approach centered around core human capacities that a just society should distribute.
Equality and justice are related but distinct concepts. Equality refers to treating all people the same, while justice considers fairness and individual circumstances and outcomes. True justice cannot be achieved through equality alone. Different cultures understand justice in varying ways based on their shared history and beliefs. Key debates around justice include whether it stems from divine commands, natural law, human design, or a balance of consequences. Theories of justice also consider how to distribute goods fairly in a society.
Justice refers to fairness and equality under the law. It is a complex concept with various understandings and definitions. The document discusses definitions of justice, types of justice including distributive, compensatory, retributive, and social justice. It also examines the criminal justice system as consisting of five pillars - law enforcement, prosecution, judiciary, corrections, and community involvement - working together to investigate crimes, prosecute offenders, and rehabilitate criminals.
Distributive justice involves how benefits and burdens in society should be distributed. It addresses questions like how income, wealth, and opportunities should be distributed among individuals and groups. There are various theories for the basis of distribution, such as equality, merit, free market transactions, or maximizing individual needs. John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness holds that social and economic inequalities are justified only if they benefit the least advantaged and positions are open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
Theories of Justice (John Rawls and Amartya Sen)AnshikaBaghel1
John Rawls and Amartya Sen proposed influential theories of justice. [1] Rawls argued for a "veil of ignorance" where people in an "original position" wouldn't know their status and would choose principles for a just society. [2] Sen criticized Rawls' approach and argued justice involves comparative evaluation of institutions based on an independent spectator. [3] Both philosophers aimed to define justice, though they disagreed on methodology.
John Rawls proposed a theory of justice based on two principles that he believed rational individuals would choose from behind a "veil of ignorance". The first principle guarantees equal basic liberties for all, while the second, or "difference principle", allows inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls believed his principles combined elements of both deontological and utilitarian ethical theories to establish a fair distribution of rights and resources in a just society.
This document discusses concepts related to justice and morality. It begins by summarizing Harold Hall's wrongful conviction and release after 19 years in prison due to post-conviction DNA evidence proving his innocence. It then defines concepts of justice such as fairness, equality, and impartiality. It examines Aristotle's views on rectificatory and distributive justice. It outlines major components of justice recognized today, including distributive and corrective justice. It also discusses theories of distributive justice, criticisms of Rawls' theory, and examples related to healthcare reform, economic inequality protests, and criminal justice cases.
The document discusses John Rawls' theory of justice, which argues that a just social contract can only exist if people make decisions from behind a "veil of ignorance" without knowing their status or position. It examines how Rawls believes liberty and equality should be the two fundamental principles of justice. Several appendices are included that provide examples intended to illustrate injustices in modern society and ways in which Rawls' principles are not fully realized.
This document discusses several theories of justice, including Rawls' theory of a just society based on principles chosen from behind a "veil of ignorance" where people's talents and positions are unknown. It also summarizes Nozick's entitlement theory of a minimal state and contrasts this with Rawls' end-result principles. The document concludes by outlining Sen's capabilities approach focusing on basic functions and Nussbaum's capabilities approach centered around core human capacities that a just society should distribute.
John Rawls (1921-2002) was a hugely influential US philosopher known for attempting to reconcile liberal beliefs in freedom with the need to prevent excessive inequality in society. His best known work, A Theory of Justice (1972), proposed a thought experiment where people create a just society from behind a "veil of ignorance" without knowing their place in it. Rawls argued this would lead people to choose principles guaranteeing equal rights, respect for all, and a minimum standard of living so that the worst off are not below a certain level, even if this requires some inequalities. He called this the "difference principle."
The document discusses John Rawls' theory of justice as presented in his book "A Theory of Justice". It summarizes some of Rawls' key ideas including the original position, veil of ignorance, difference principle, and justice as fairness. Rawls proposes two principles of justice: 1) equal basic liberties for all, and 2) inequalities must benefit the least advantaged and arise from fair equality of opportunity. He argues justice should be defined by impartial principles that would be agreed to from an initial position of equality.
1) John Rawls proposes a theory of justice based on two principles that would be chosen by rational individuals in an "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" where they do not know their place in society.
2) The two principles are equal liberty for all and that inequalities must benefit the least advantaged members of society.
3) Rawls believes these principles balance considerations of individual rights and welfare that are found in philosophies like Kantianism and Utilitarianism.
The document defines justice as fairness and reasonableness. It discusses how in any situation, such as in a courtroom, workplace, or bank, people want to be treated fairly without discrimination. A key aspect of justice is ensuring laws are administered impartially. However, disagreements often arise over what is considered a just outcome. The document explores several scenarios and whether respondents considered the outcomes as examples of justice or injustice.
Summary of Social Contract Theory by Hobbes, Locke and RousseauA K DAS's | Law
The document summarizes social contract theories by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. It discusses that according to social contract theory, people lived in a state of nature without government or law and entered agreements to form societies and governments. It then summarizes the key aspects of each philosopher's social contract theory, including their views of the state of nature and the rights and powers transferred to the sovereign or government through the social contract.
The document discusses key concepts related to communication theory, diversity vocabulary, and advocacy. It defines social justice as promoting a just society by challenging injustice and valuing diversity. It also discusses fairness, discrimination, advocacy, and allocating resources equitably without prejudicing groups based on attributes such as gender, religion, or race. Advocacy is defined as speaking on behalf of and taking action to protect the rights of others.
John Rawls' theory of justice proposes two principles of justice: 1) Each person has equal basic rights and liberties, and 2) Social and economic inequalities are acceptable only if they benefit society's least advantaged members. Rawls argues these principles would be chosen by individuals in an "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" where they do not know their abilities or social status. While some aspects like equal opportunity are practical, critics argue Rawls' conception of the original position is unrealistic. Overall, Rawls' theory provides an important framework for thinking about justice, though some elements may not be directly applicable in reality.
Legal Realism was a reaction against a formalistic view of law that saw judges as simply applying precise rules to facts. Legal Realists argued that law is what courts actually do rather than predefined rules. They pointed to cases like Bailey v. Bailey in Ohio where the court ignored the plain meaning of a statute to count spousal support as income. While aiming to take a pragmatic view, Legal Realism was criticized for giving a distorted view of judicial reasoning and failing to distinguish between a judge's role and other influences on decisions.
Introduction to english jurisprudence (1)AQSA SHAHID
Jurisprudence is the study of fundamental legal principles and their relationship to other social sciences. It is derived from the Latin terms "juris" meaning law and "prudentia" meaning knowledge. Jurisprudence has three main branches: historical jurisprudence examines the origins and development of law; analytical jurisprudence analyzes basic legal concepts and principles; and ethical jurisprudence approaches law from an ethical perspective of how it should ideally be. Jurisprudence has practical applications such as providing terminology to legislators, filling gaps in laws, and helping legal professionals better understand statutes. It also relates to other fields like sociology, psychology, economics, and politics that influence and are influenced by legal systems.
This document discusses different principles of distributive justice. It defines distributive justice as concerning how benefits and burdens are distributed among members of society. There are five types of distributive justice norms: equity, equality, power, need, and responsibility. Equity means allocation is based on input, while equality means all receive the same regardless of input. The document also discusses three principles of distributive justice: egalitarian (equal for all), capitalist (based on contributions), and socialist (based on need and ability).
This document discusses the relationship between law and morality. It begins by defining morality as rules of conduct that are seen as right or wrong within a society. There are different sources and types of morality. The relationship between law and morality is complex, as they sometimes overlap but also diverge. While law is based on rules and aims to establish order, morality is based on societal values and beliefs. The document examines several cases and issues to illustrate debates around public versus private morality, and whether immoral acts should be legalized.
The document provides biographical information on John Rawls and outlines some of the key aspects of his theory of justice, known as justice as fairness. Rawls believed that rational individuals in an original position behind a veil of ignorance would choose principles of equal liberty and to maximize the position of the least advantaged in society. His theory aims to establish a just framework for the basic structure of society through principles that are fair to all individuals regardless of their status or position.
This document discusses the topic of social justice from a Catholic perspective. It begins by summarizing a Gospel passage where Jesus warns his followers that they will face persecution for preaching in his name. It then explores different definitions of justice, including commutative, distributive, contributive/legal, and social justice. It examines the types of justice through the lens of Catholic social teaching. Finally, it considers definitions of social justice and discusses the relationship between justice and love.
John Rawls' theory of justice argues that a just society is one designed to maximize liberty for its members and minimize inequalities. He proposes using an "original position" and "veil of ignorance" thought experiment, where people choose principles of justice without knowing their status or abilities, to develop fair rules. Rawls argues this would lead people to adopt a "difference principle" allowing inequalities only if they improve conditions for the least well-off. His theory reconciles liberty and equality and aims to establish a model for a just social contract. It has been influential but also faces criticisms around its hypothetical nature and treatment of concepts like the family.
John Rawls was an influential 20th century American political philosopher known for his theory of justice as fairness. In his seminal work A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues that a just society can be formed through a hypothetical social contract made by free and equal individuals behind a veil of ignorance, who would agree to two principles of justice: equal basic liberties and inequalities that benefit the least advantaged. Rawls' work provides a philosophical foundation for egalitarian liberalism and is widely interpreted as justifying the modern welfare state.
The document discusses the concept of global distributive justice. It argues that we have duties of justice on a global scale due to the relationships and institutions that connect all people in the modern world. Specifically, it points to three views of how these relationships generate global duties: 1) all people share a single world, 2) people can affect each other through economic and environmental interactions, 3) common global institutions shape our impacts on one another. The document also discusses non-relational views which argue humans have basic rights and duties of justice simply due to our shared humanity.
This document provides summaries of several major sociological theories and perspectives:
- The functionalist perspective developed by Emile Durkheim focuses on how society functions as an interrelated system to maintain stability.
- The conflict perspective developed by Karl Marx focuses on how competition for scarce resources leads to social change and conflict.
- Max Weber's interactionist perspective focuses on how individuals interact through symbols and attach subjective meanings to actions.
It also provides brief biographies of Durkheim, Marx, and Weber, outlining their major concepts and contributions to sociology.
This document discusses the concept of equality, including:
- It defines equality as meaning that all people should have equal opportunities and treatment regardless of background.
- It outlines different types of equality, including legal, natural, political, social, and economic equality.
- It provides a more in-depth explanation of equality of opportunity, describing formal, substantive, and democratic conceptions of equality of opportunity. It also discusses the role of affirmative action programs.
Jurisprudence its meaning, nature and scopeanjalidixit21
This document discusses the meaning, nature, and scope of jurisprudence. It defines jurisprudence as the knowledge of law and explains that it is the study of the sources, validity, objectives, functions, and effects of fundamental legal principles. Several jurists are cited defining jurisprudence as the observation of divine and human things, the philosophy of positive law, the science of the first principles of law, and the scientific study of the union of legal rules. The document also outlines different types of jurisprudence according to various jurists and lists several influential books written on the topic.
Rawlsian contract theory attempts to reconcile utilitarianism and intuitionism through a theory of distributive justice. Rawls proposes an "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" where individuals would choose principles of justice not knowing their place in society. He argues they would choose two principles: 1) Equal basic liberties for all and 2) Social and economic inequalities must benefit the least advantaged and arise from fair equality of opportunity.
Deontological Ethical Philosophies
Lecture
Rights
Merriam-Webster defines "right" as "something to which one has a just claim." That which he or she claims can be a tangible object, a privilege, the opportunity to behave in a certain way, or to have others behave towards him or her in a certain way. Some rights are legal and others are moral. If one's rights are protected by law, we consider them to be legal rights. Boatright also points out a distinction between specific and general rights. General rights might be considered “human rights” as they apply to all people. Specific rights are those that particular people possess due to their circumstances, such as an employment contract.
Rights can also be described as positive or negative. Negative rights act as barriers that keep others from limiting our rights, while a positive right obligates others to support our right or position in some way. My right to life is a negative right that keeps others from taking my life. However, it does not require others (individual people, organizations, or governments) to do anything or give anything to give me life.
Immanuel Kant developed an approach to decision making that requires one to act in a certain way simply because it is the right thing to do. He calls the approach the "categorical imperative," and communicates this imperative in various formulations. In addition to the categorical imperative, Kant wrote about hypothetical imperatives. These are conditional requirements, so that if a person wants something or believes he should do something, then he or she should take the necessary steps to fulfill that desire or that sense of obligation. The categorical imperative is not conditional in nature. There are two primary formulations of the categorical imperative.
First, Kant stated, "I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law." Do you think the decision makers who took Enron down the wrong road would recommend their decisions for all business people everywhere and at all times? Most likely not.
This formulation includes the concept of reversibility, which sounds like the Golden Rule. Basically, I must be willing for others to use my same rationale against me if the roles are reversed. Further, the concept also includes the element of universalizability. Every person at all times should be able to follow the rationale I use.
Kant's second formulation says, "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end."
People should follow these formulations, according to Kant, even if breaking them seems to have more of a utilitarian benefit. Holding down one person or one class of persons might benefit society in general, but does not pass the test of reversibility or universalizability. For example, slavery is a very efficient means of increasing work productivity and keeping co.
John Rawls (1921-2002) was a hugely influential US philosopher known for attempting to reconcile liberal beliefs in freedom with the need to prevent excessive inequality in society. His best known work, A Theory of Justice (1972), proposed a thought experiment where people create a just society from behind a "veil of ignorance" without knowing their place in it. Rawls argued this would lead people to choose principles guaranteeing equal rights, respect for all, and a minimum standard of living so that the worst off are not below a certain level, even if this requires some inequalities. He called this the "difference principle."
The document discusses John Rawls' theory of justice as presented in his book "A Theory of Justice". It summarizes some of Rawls' key ideas including the original position, veil of ignorance, difference principle, and justice as fairness. Rawls proposes two principles of justice: 1) equal basic liberties for all, and 2) inequalities must benefit the least advantaged and arise from fair equality of opportunity. He argues justice should be defined by impartial principles that would be agreed to from an initial position of equality.
1) John Rawls proposes a theory of justice based on two principles that would be chosen by rational individuals in an "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" where they do not know their place in society.
2) The two principles are equal liberty for all and that inequalities must benefit the least advantaged members of society.
3) Rawls believes these principles balance considerations of individual rights and welfare that are found in philosophies like Kantianism and Utilitarianism.
The document defines justice as fairness and reasonableness. It discusses how in any situation, such as in a courtroom, workplace, or bank, people want to be treated fairly without discrimination. A key aspect of justice is ensuring laws are administered impartially. However, disagreements often arise over what is considered a just outcome. The document explores several scenarios and whether respondents considered the outcomes as examples of justice or injustice.
Summary of Social Contract Theory by Hobbes, Locke and RousseauA K DAS's | Law
The document summarizes social contract theories by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. It discusses that according to social contract theory, people lived in a state of nature without government or law and entered agreements to form societies and governments. It then summarizes the key aspects of each philosopher's social contract theory, including their views of the state of nature and the rights and powers transferred to the sovereign or government through the social contract.
The document discusses key concepts related to communication theory, diversity vocabulary, and advocacy. It defines social justice as promoting a just society by challenging injustice and valuing diversity. It also discusses fairness, discrimination, advocacy, and allocating resources equitably without prejudicing groups based on attributes such as gender, religion, or race. Advocacy is defined as speaking on behalf of and taking action to protect the rights of others.
John Rawls' theory of justice proposes two principles of justice: 1) Each person has equal basic rights and liberties, and 2) Social and economic inequalities are acceptable only if they benefit society's least advantaged members. Rawls argues these principles would be chosen by individuals in an "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" where they do not know their abilities or social status. While some aspects like equal opportunity are practical, critics argue Rawls' conception of the original position is unrealistic. Overall, Rawls' theory provides an important framework for thinking about justice, though some elements may not be directly applicable in reality.
Legal Realism was a reaction against a formalistic view of law that saw judges as simply applying precise rules to facts. Legal Realists argued that law is what courts actually do rather than predefined rules. They pointed to cases like Bailey v. Bailey in Ohio where the court ignored the plain meaning of a statute to count spousal support as income. While aiming to take a pragmatic view, Legal Realism was criticized for giving a distorted view of judicial reasoning and failing to distinguish between a judge's role and other influences on decisions.
Introduction to english jurisprudence (1)AQSA SHAHID
Jurisprudence is the study of fundamental legal principles and their relationship to other social sciences. It is derived from the Latin terms "juris" meaning law and "prudentia" meaning knowledge. Jurisprudence has three main branches: historical jurisprudence examines the origins and development of law; analytical jurisprudence analyzes basic legal concepts and principles; and ethical jurisprudence approaches law from an ethical perspective of how it should ideally be. Jurisprudence has practical applications such as providing terminology to legislators, filling gaps in laws, and helping legal professionals better understand statutes. It also relates to other fields like sociology, psychology, economics, and politics that influence and are influenced by legal systems.
This document discusses different principles of distributive justice. It defines distributive justice as concerning how benefits and burdens are distributed among members of society. There are five types of distributive justice norms: equity, equality, power, need, and responsibility. Equity means allocation is based on input, while equality means all receive the same regardless of input. The document also discusses three principles of distributive justice: egalitarian (equal for all), capitalist (based on contributions), and socialist (based on need and ability).
This document discusses the relationship between law and morality. It begins by defining morality as rules of conduct that are seen as right or wrong within a society. There are different sources and types of morality. The relationship between law and morality is complex, as they sometimes overlap but also diverge. While law is based on rules and aims to establish order, morality is based on societal values and beliefs. The document examines several cases and issues to illustrate debates around public versus private morality, and whether immoral acts should be legalized.
The document provides biographical information on John Rawls and outlines some of the key aspects of his theory of justice, known as justice as fairness. Rawls believed that rational individuals in an original position behind a veil of ignorance would choose principles of equal liberty and to maximize the position of the least advantaged in society. His theory aims to establish a just framework for the basic structure of society through principles that are fair to all individuals regardless of their status or position.
This document discusses the topic of social justice from a Catholic perspective. It begins by summarizing a Gospel passage where Jesus warns his followers that they will face persecution for preaching in his name. It then explores different definitions of justice, including commutative, distributive, contributive/legal, and social justice. It examines the types of justice through the lens of Catholic social teaching. Finally, it considers definitions of social justice and discusses the relationship between justice and love.
John Rawls' theory of justice argues that a just society is one designed to maximize liberty for its members and minimize inequalities. He proposes using an "original position" and "veil of ignorance" thought experiment, where people choose principles of justice without knowing their status or abilities, to develop fair rules. Rawls argues this would lead people to adopt a "difference principle" allowing inequalities only if they improve conditions for the least well-off. His theory reconciles liberty and equality and aims to establish a model for a just social contract. It has been influential but also faces criticisms around its hypothetical nature and treatment of concepts like the family.
John Rawls was an influential 20th century American political philosopher known for his theory of justice as fairness. In his seminal work A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues that a just society can be formed through a hypothetical social contract made by free and equal individuals behind a veil of ignorance, who would agree to two principles of justice: equal basic liberties and inequalities that benefit the least advantaged. Rawls' work provides a philosophical foundation for egalitarian liberalism and is widely interpreted as justifying the modern welfare state.
The document discusses the concept of global distributive justice. It argues that we have duties of justice on a global scale due to the relationships and institutions that connect all people in the modern world. Specifically, it points to three views of how these relationships generate global duties: 1) all people share a single world, 2) people can affect each other through economic and environmental interactions, 3) common global institutions shape our impacts on one another. The document also discusses non-relational views which argue humans have basic rights and duties of justice simply due to our shared humanity.
This document provides summaries of several major sociological theories and perspectives:
- The functionalist perspective developed by Emile Durkheim focuses on how society functions as an interrelated system to maintain stability.
- The conflict perspective developed by Karl Marx focuses on how competition for scarce resources leads to social change and conflict.
- Max Weber's interactionist perspective focuses on how individuals interact through symbols and attach subjective meanings to actions.
It also provides brief biographies of Durkheim, Marx, and Weber, outlining their major concepts and contributions to sociology.
This document discusses the concept of equality, including:
- It defines equality as meaning that all people should have equal opportunities and treatment regardless of background.
- It outlines different types of equality, including legal, natural, political, social, and economic equality.
- It provides a more in-depth explanation of equality of opportunity, describing formal, substantive, and democratic conceptions of equality of opportunity. It also discusses the role of affirmative action programs.
Jurisprudence its meaning, nature and scopeanjalidixit21
This document discusses the meaning, nature, and scope of jurisprudence. It defines jurisprudence as the knowledge of law and explains that it is the study of the sources, validity, objectives, functions, and effects of fundamental legal principles. Several jurists are cited defining jurisprudence as the observation of divine and human things, the philosophy of positive law, the science of the first principles of law, and the scientific study of the union of legal rules. The document also outlines different types of jurisprudence according to various jurists and lists several influential books written on the topic.
Rawlsian contract theory attempts to reconcile utilitarianism and intuitionism through a theory of distributive justice. Rawls proposes an "original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" where individuals would choose principles of justice not knowing their place in society. He argues they would choose two principles: 1) Equal basic liberties for all and 2) Social and economic inequalities must benefit the least advantaged and arise from fair equality of opportunity.
Deontological Ethical Philosophies
Lecture
Rights
Merriam-Webster defines "right" as "something to which one has a just claim." That which he or she claims can be a tangible object, a privilege, the opportunity to behave in a certain way, or to have others behave towards him or her in a certain way. Some rights are legal and others are moral. If one's rights are protected by law, we consider them to be legal rights. Boatright also points out a distinction between specific and general rights. General rights might be considered “human rights” as they apply to all people. Specific rights are those that particular people possess due to their circumstances, such as an employment contract.
Rights can also be described as positive or negative. Negative rights act as barriers that keep others from limiting our rights, while a positive right obligates others to support our right or position in some way. My right to life is a negative right that keeps others from taking my life. However, it does not require others (individual people, organizations, or governments) to do anything or give anything to give me life.
Immanuel Kant developed an approach to decision making that requires one to act in a certain way simply because it is the right thing to do. He calls the approach the "categorical imperative," and communicates this imperative in various formulations. In addition to the categorical imperative, Kant wrote about hypothetical imperatives. These are conditional requirements, so that if a person wants something or believes he should do something, then he or she should take the necessary steps to fulfill that desire or that sense of obligation. The categorical imperative is not conditional in nature. There are two primary formulations of the categorical imperative.
First, Kant stated, "I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law." Do you think the decision makers who took Enron down the wrong road would recommend their decisions for all business people everywhere and at all times? Most likely not.
This formulation includes the concept of reversibility, which sounds like the Golden Rule. Basically, I must be willing for others to use my same rationale against me if the roles are reversed. Further, the concept also includes the element of universalizability. Every person at all times should be able to follow the rationale I use.
Kant's second formulation says, "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end."
People should follow these formulations, according to Kant, even if breaking them seems to have more of a utilitarian benefit. Holding down one person or one class of persons might benefit society in general, but does not pass the test of reversibility or universalizability. For example, slavery is a very efficient means of increasing work productivity and keeping co.
This document discusses several ethical theories and concepts:
- Kant's categorical imperative and the idea of treating people as ends rather than means
- Criticisms of Kant's theory around vagueness and inability to resolve conflicts
- John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness, which involves equal basic liberties and inequalities that benefit the least advantaged
- Retributive justice requiring proportional punishment for wrongs
- Compensatory justice around restoring losses from wrongs
- The ethics of care focusing on preserving relationships and caring for the vulnerable
- Virtue ethics examining habits and dispositions like prudence, justice, courage and temperance
It compares different approaches to ethics and explores integrating considerations of utility,
Key Concepts in Social Work - a personal and philosophical meanderCitizen Network
Social Work is in the social justice business. But what do we mean by social justice? How do overcome the dangers of paternalism and institutionalisation? What do we mean by citizenship? What is the link between needs and rights?
Justice and fairness are closely related concepts regarding impartial treatment. Justice means giving each person their due by considering only relevant factors, while fairness refers to judging without bias based on concrete details. When interests conflict over scarce resources, principles of justice and fairness are needed to reasonably determine what people deserve. Such principles include treating equals equally and unequals differently based on relevance to the situation. Justice in everyday life requires evaluating if actions treat all people equally and differences are justified. Fairness also matters by cultivating trust, responsibility and morality through consistent, unbiased treatment of all people and situations.
Social justice refers to achieving fairness and impartial treatment in all aspects of society rather than just through legal systems. It involves fair distribution of benefits and burdens. There are differing views on what constitutes fairness. Ensuring social justice is both a philosophical and political issue with differing ideological views on creating a just society through policies around equality of opportunity and outcome. Throughout history, civilizations have sought to establish just systems of law and order to provide both structure and a sense of responsibility to populations. Early Hebrew and Greek/Roman systems focused on principles of justice for all as a foundation for modern Western legal protections of societal order and the common good.
Copy of Social justice, sometimes called civi...Praveen Sudarsan
Social justice refers to achieving fairness and impartial treatment in all aspects of society rather than just through legal systems. It involves fair distribution of advantages and disadvantages. There are differing views on what constitutes a just society. Throughout history, civilizations have sought to create fair and equal justice systems to establish social order and responsibility. Early legal systems from the Hebrews, Greeks and Romans focusing on principles like "an eye for an eye" and trials by peers, which modern Western justice systems are built upon. However, achieving a truly just society where violence, injustice and greed are absent has proven difficult.
The document discusses four types of justice: distributive justice, which is about fairness in how goods and resources are distributed; procedural justice, which is about fairness in the processes used to determine distributions; restorative justice, which focuses on restoring what was lost through acts of contrition and reparation; and retributive justice, which involves seeking revenge or punishment. The course will focus on distributive justice concerning basic needs and dignity, procedural justice concerning social structures, and restorative justice concerning solidarity when other options are not available. Basic human needs are identified as food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, education, and love.
Social justice refers to a society in which all members have equal rights, security, opportunities and social benefits. It is based on the idea of a fair and just treatment of all individuals and groups. Social justice aims for a society where everyone has their basic needs met, such as being fed and cared for when sick, while respecting the environment and treating each other with compassion. It means achieving complete equality and genuine equality for all people. Areas related to social justice include criminal justice, poverty, gender/race equality, environmental protection, and global justice.
Differences between equity and equalitySanjana zaman
This presentation discusses the differences between equity and equality. Equity refers to fairness and justice, ensuring all individuals have access to resources needed to access opportunities. Equality means treating all people the same without regard to needs. While equality aims for sameness, equity recognizes differences and counteracts unequal opportunities. The presentation provides examples showing that equity, not equality, leads to fairness by accounting for differing circumstances rather than assuming uniform treatment or needs.
Equity and Justice Conference - Presentation By - Prajwal BhattaraiPrajwal Bhattarai
On Behalf of leading positions, Mr. Bhattarai has been engaged on national & international level to talk about the role of youth in nation building & youth leadership, inspiration, start-ups along with social entrepreneurship. Being an Academic activist, he worked for gender equality, educational equity & youth empowerment for positive change as development. He is extremely passionate about SDGs & development; working everyday to enhance socio-civic activities & pro-citizens volunteering alongside addressing his experiences to captivate for affirmative impact. He is a British Parliamentary debate, Public Speaking. Communication, Networking & Social dealing trainer. Mr. Bhattarai is a diplomatic & motivated Socio Academic Activist/Explorer who's creative on motif, project, poetries, animation, designs & more.
Welfare liberalism, justice as fairness, just society, accident of birth, original position, principles of justice, difference principle, social contractarianism, principle of reciprocity, just savings principle
This includes topics such as the Theory of Justice, the role of justice, the subject of justice, the main idea in the theory of justice, what is original position and justification, classical utilitarianism, intuitionism and some remarks moral theory. for the second part, it includes principles of justice, democratic theory, social good and social security.
The document discusses different principles of distributive justice:
- Egalitarianism argues benefits and burdens should be distributed equally. However, critics say this removes incentives for hard work.
- Capitalist justice argues benefits should be distributed based on individual contributions. But this can promote competition over cooperation.
- Socialism argues benefits should be distributed based on needs and work assigned based on abilities. However, critics say this removes incentives to work hard and individual freedom.
The document discusses different types of justice according to Catholic social teaching, including commutative justice concerning relationships between individuals, legal justice concerning individuals' obedience to laws, and distributive justice concerning society's distribution of wealth. It also discusses concepts like solidarity, preferential option for the poor, and proportional equality in how people are rewarded for their work.
6-Rights-and-duties.ppt prepared for law studentsujitsharma60
Rights and duties are interdependent. Rights exist within society and are claims that individuals can make on their society for their development, but must be exercised to promote social good, not against it. Rights are not absolute and carry limitations to maintain public health, security and morality. Both natural/moral rights and legal/civil rights exist, but legal rights are created by legislation while moral rights are discovered. For every right, there is a corresponding duty - individuals have a duty to respect the rights of others and not infringe upon them. Citizens have both rights and duties toward the state, enjoying rights but also performing duties like obeying laws and defending the state. Rights and duties are inseparable.
Deontological ethics holds that some actions are right or wrong regardless of their consequences. It denies that the ends justify the means. Kant's categorical imperative provides a principle of ethics - that we should only act according to maxims that could be universally followed. Using child labor violates our duty to respect children by treating them as means rather than ends. Rights protect fundamental interests connected to well-being and autonomy, overriding collective happiness.
This document discusses Marxist theories about the state, oppression, and emancipation. It addresses several key ideas:
1) Marxism views the state as based on power relations between classes, with the modern state supporting the dominant capitalist class.
2) Under capitalism, workers are alienated and oppressed as they do not own what they produce.
3) A communist society would overcome alienation by meeting people's needs through meaningful, creative work and strong community relations rather than individualism.
4) Some object that Marxism overstates the determination of ideas by the economic base, and that ideas can also influence social and economic conditions.
1) A nation is a group of people united in some way, such as by a common culture or identity, while a state is a political structure that defines legal rights and obligations of citizens.
2) National identity develops from being raised in the same cultural environment as others in a nation, which fosters a sense of unity and allows for stereotyping of national groups.
3) Nationalism involves caring about one's nation and national identity, and pursuing political self-determination for the nation. However, some argue national sentiment can be irrational or imposed by political elites.
The document discusses whether war can ever be morally justified according to just war theory. It outlines the main principles of just war theory, including jus ad bellum (justice of resorting to war), jus in bello (just conduct during war), and jus post bellum (justice after war). It also discusses views like realism that are skeptical of applying moral concepts like justice to war. According to just war theory, a war can only be just if it meets criteria like having a just cause, being declared officially and as a last resort, having a reasonable chance of success, and using proportional force.
This document discusses different theories of political and moral rights. It outlines Wesley Hohfeld's 4-fold structure of rights, including privileges, claims, powers, and immunities. Natural rights are discussed as being moral and universal, while positive rights are established by laws. The document also examines different justifications for rights, including that they protect individual interests, choices, and attributes or that they appeal to moral or political goals like utility. However, the document raises objections to each of these theories and concludes that the concept of rights should be abandoned.
This document discusses different conceptions of liberty, including negative and positive freedom as defined by Isaiah Berlin. Negative freedom refers to freedom from interference, while positive freedom involves having control and ability to act. The document also examines liberalism and how it relates to negative freedom, with John Stuart Mill arguing liberty allows individuals to pursue their own conception of good and discover truth, while Berlin believes the state should only secure an area for this freedom without further interference. Overall the document provides an overview of philosophical understandings and debates around the concept of liberty.
This document discusses different political ideologies and their views of human nature. It presents four views: conservatives see human nature as self-interested requiring a strong state like a leviathan; liberals view humans as generally good but needing state protection of rights; socialists believe humans are inherently social but under capitalism are made greedy by society; and Marxists see humans as primarily focused on survival, requiring cooperation which is hindered by the capitalist state that represents the ruling class. The document suggests that beliefs about human nature inform the type of government each ideology advocates, though these concepts can be debated.
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
LAND USE LAND COVER AND NDVI OF MIRZAPUR DISTRICT, UPRAHUL
This Dissertation explores the particular circumstances of Mirzapur, a region located in the
core of India. Mirzapur, with its varied terrains and abundant biodiversity, offers an optimal
environment for investigating the changes in vegetation cover dynamics. Our study utilizes
advanced technologies such as GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and Remote sensing to
analyze the transformations that have taken place over the course of a decade.
The complex relationship between human activities and the environment has been the focus
of extensive research and worry. As the global community grapples with swift urbanization,
population expansion, and economic progress, the effects on natural ecosystems are becoming
more evident. A crucial element of this impact is the alteration of vegetation cover, which plays a
significant role in maintaining the ecological equilibrium of our planet.Land serves as the foundation for all human activities and provides the necessary materials for
these activities. As the most crucial natural resource, its utilization by humans results in different
'Land uses,' which are determined by both human activities and the physical characteristics of the
land.
The utilization of land is impacted by human needs and environmental factors. In countries
like India, rapid population growth and the emphasis on extensive resource exploitation can lead
to significant land degradation, adversely affecting the region's land cover.
Therefore, human intervention has significantly influenced land use patterns over many
centuries, evolving its structure over time and space. In the present era, these changes have
accelerated due to factors such as agriculture and urbanization. Information regarding land use and
cover is essential for various planning and management tasks related to the Earth's surface,
providing crucial environmental data for scientific, resource management, policy purposes, and
diverse human activities.
Accurate understanding of land use and cover is imperative for the development planning
of any area. Consequently, a wide range of professionals, including earth system scientists, land
and water managers, and urban planners, are interested in obtaining data on land use and cover
changes, conversion trends, and other related patterns. The spatial dimensions of land use and
cover support policymakers and scientists in making well-informed decisions, as alterations in
these patterns indicate shifts in economic and social conditions. Monitoring such changes with the
help of Advanced technologies like Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems is
crucial for coordinated efforts across different administrative levels. Advanced technologies like
Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems
9
Changes in vegetation cover refer to variations in the distribution, composition, and overall
structure of plant communities across different temporal and spatial scales. These changes can
occur natural.
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
How to Setup Warehouse & Location in Odoo 17 InventoryCeline George
In this slide, we'll explore how to set up warehouses and locations in Odoo 17 Inventory. This will help us manage our stock effectively, track inventory levels, and streamline warehouse operations.
This presentation was provided by Steph Pollock of The American Psychological Association’s Journals Program, and Damita Snow, of The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), for the initial session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session One: 'Setting Expectations: a DEIA Primer,' was held June 6, 2024.
How to Make a Field Mandatory in Odoo 17Celine George
In Odoo, making a field required can be done through both Python code and XML views. When you set the required attribute to True in Python code, it makes the field required across all views where it's used. Conversely, when you set the required attribute in XML views, it makes the field required only in the context of that particular view.
How to Add Chatter in the odoo 17 ERP ModuleCeline George
In Odoo, the chatter is like a chat tool that helps you work together on records. You can leave notes and track things, making it easier to talk with your team and partners. Inside chatter, all communication history, activity, and changes will be displayed.
Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docxadhitya5119
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
The simplified electron and muon model, Oscillating Spacetime: The Foundation...RitikBhardwaj56
Discover the Simplified Electron and Muon Model: A New Wave-Based Approach to Understanding Particles delves into a groundbreaking theory that presents electrons and muons as rotating soliton waves within oscillating spacetime. Geared towards students, researchers, and science buffs, this book breaks down complex ideas into simple explanations. It covers topics such as electron waves, temporal dynamics, and the implications of this model on particle physics. With clear illustrations and easy-to-follow explanations, readers will gain a new outlook on the universe's fundamental nature.
2. It is the idea we’re required to treat eachother
equally. If you do bad to someone, you’ll have
to pay your ‘dues’ in order for equality to be
restored i.e. a murderer going to prison for
life or facing the death penalty.
Justice branches to in punishment and
distribution of goods in society – further
divides to – political; basic liberties and rights
& social, economic or distributive; money and
oppourtunities.
3. Specifies which ‘goods’ are being considered
and how to divide the good.
Equality
Morally everyone is equal. On moral equality
we can argue for ‘assumed’ equality –
inequalities need to be justified. We require
strict equality unless we have good reason
why another distribution would be better.
Inequalities cannot be justified leads to
egalitarianism (the view that justice requires
equality).
4. People should receive equal amounts of goods as it best respects
their moral equality.
OBJECTIONS;
-What counts as the same ‘amount’?
-We could give each individual the same goods – food, house etc,
but it’s not a good interpretation as people have different
preferences.
-Giving people freedom with their money creates inequalities as
some may be able to make more from what they’ve got while
others only lose it.
-It overlooks what people need a disabled person will need greater
government funding than an able-bodied person for medical
treatments etc.
-Ultimately means that differences are being treated unequally.
-To live equally everyone requires equal opportunities but what is
this?
5. Equality is for people to have equally happy lives.
this does depend on what makes each individual happy – someone may
have rich tastes requiring more money to be as happy as someone
with simpler tastes.
‘Equality of resources’ – everyone’s resources are equal if no-one envies
another. Once achieved, people can do what they want with their
resources – it leads to inequality but egalitarians believe justice is to
take away disadvantages people suffer that aren’t results of their
choices.
People are morally responsible for their choices & actions – if you choose
to live in a mansion you can’t expect to be given extra money to
support this.
OBJECTIONS;
If two people have different capacities, equal resources wont ensure
equality – one will be able to do more than the other. We should
instead have ‘equal access to advantage’ – able to make equal use of
whatever makes life better.
6. 1) We can’t ensure equality. Its impossible to
distinguish between aspects of peoples lives
resulting from inheritance or choice.
2) Any egalitarian principle of justice restricts
freedom.
3) We can object that everyone will be better
off if we don’t respect equality – economic
equality – higher salary for better work
creates incentives for people to produce
more wealth.
7. Need is a social construction – it is what we
decide it is. What people need is not equal.
A need isn’t like a desire as it isnt a
psychological state – a child needing
medicine doesn’t depend on if he wants to
take it.
A need is objective – a need depends on facts
about their health both physical and
psychological. A need is necessary to achieve
a level of human flourishing.
8. There is a danger of ‘needs-inflation’ – where we as a
society decide that a certain aspect will better our lives,
and so the things to help that can become needs. i.e. if we
find out we can live longer by our diet, lifestyle etc, do our
diets and lifestyles become a need?
Should justice be concerned with needs taken ‘absolutely’ or
does it need to take into account comparisons? –
comparisons enable a society to become richer and
increase its ‘needs’- without comparison society can gain
inequalities without injustice.
Needs change with society – saying yes to some things may
appear like ‘needs-inflation’ but it may be necessary for
everyone to live similarly equal lives.
Egalitarians – ‘need’ does not do justice to equality. People
will not always need what they deserve – nor deserve what
they need.
9. People should be treated according to their specific
qualities and actions. Distributed goods are rewards
people receive in response to how they choose to live.
1) Effort: justice means people are rewarded to the effort
they make. People deserve to keep what they make for
the effort they put into making it.
2) Compensation: all the costs someone incurs deserves
reward – they should be compensated accordingly.
3) Contribution: the value of the contribution determines
what they deserve to receive
4) Virtue: a persons virtues determine what they deserve.
10. We can object; rewarding desert is impractical.
How can we identify what is effort or cost?
The ‘free market’ should reward someone
proportionally to how valuable their contribution
is. – it’s not true. It distributes based on how
much and how many people desire what’s
offered.Market values are affected by scarcity –
gold is wanted as it is rare, not useful.
Noone should get greater reward for providing
something that’s scarce, unless its crucial to
social welfare.
11. Justice doesn’t require people getting what they
deserve. The winner of a race gets the prize, not
the person who put most effort in or most
deserved to win.
The rewards we get are based on our choices –but
there are factors outside our control which affect
how much our contribution is valued – how much
others value it for instance.
Desert can’t define justice because it presupposes
justice. You only deserve something if you
deserve it following the rules.
Structure of reward doesn’t necessarily reflect
what people do or don’t deserve.
12. Just distribution of goods requires intervention.
Justice isn’t the only political value – justification
of redistribution requires we consider other
values such as liberty.
‘equal access to advantage’ suggests no-one
should be disadvantaged if it doesn’t result from
choice.
Need claims justice requires basic needs are met –
so those who cant provide for their own needs
will have to be provided for by those who have
more than they need.
Desert claims justice requires reward in proportion
to value of the contribution – redistribution is
needed to balance the market.
13. Distributive justice is based on society being a ‘system
of cooperation for mutual advantage between
individuals’.
Justice is the most important political value as it applies
to ‘basic institutions of society’.
The conditions for cooperation need to be defended –
inequalities (of social positions) also need to be
justified.
Principles of justice
‘the principles that free and rational persons… to
further their own interests would accept in an initial
position of equality as defining the fundamental
terms…’
Justice is fairness.
14. For us to agree to a social contract we need to
eliminate bias to certain groups i.e. rich or poor.
Rawls assumes we’re able to agree theses principles
unsure of our position in society – we don’t know if
we’re going to be rich or poor, like playing a game of
monopoly you eliminate bias by giving everyone the
same money and same opportunities to roll –
regardless of knowing if you’re going to win or not.
The veil of ignorance allows that ‘no one is advantaged
or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the
outcome of natural chance or social circumstances…
no one is able to design principles to favour his
particular condition, the principles of justice are the
result of fair agreement…’
15. For the contract to be just we need to make the
rules based on everyone being in the same
starting position – instead of assuming the
outcome will be a certain way and so allowing
the rules to benefit the poor more greatly.
Like assuming a person who goes to the gym
regularly would win a race over someone that
doesn’t – both have the same length to run
and the same starting line.
16. Inequality
We can only assume the goods being distributed are those
that everyone wants – rights, liberties, powers,
opportunities, income etc.
We will agree to equal distribution – unless inequality will
work to everyone's advantage. We may need inequality to
give people motivation to work – a low income earner will
have greater motivation to work than someone with a high
income as they will need a higher income to achieve the
same happiness and ultimately provide greater wealth for
society.
Equality
After there is secured material well-being we then become
to value our basic liberties more so. This Is when we will
prefer equal liberty over unequal liberty with greater
wealth.
17. Both equality and inequality lead to political
justice,(>) and social justice.
1) Each individual should have equal right to a
system of equal basic liberties.
2) Social and economic equalities should be
arranged so the least advantaged benefits the
most.
Social inequalities should be to everyone’s benefit
–social inequality should make the poor richer–
we should maximise the minimum welfare
OBJ: it makes just as much sense to maximise the
average wealth – there’s equality of opportunity
allowing someone to improve their position.
18. Our individual interests can be identified prior to
existence in society.
OBJECTIONS;
Rejected by Marx and conservatism - it rules out theory
that sees social bonds as intrinsically good – its
assumes we’re fundamentally separate rather than
naturally social.
Rawls assumes we can live meaningfully being the ‘veil
of ignorance’. But we can’t make up the ideal ‘good
society’ behind this veil – our values and ideas of
what is good comes from others.
By this even redistribution that is justified, by Rawls’
argument it wouldn’t be.
19. Equality, need and desert don’t link distributive
justice to liberty or rights. Rawls does.
Rawls’ first principle of justice covers liberty –
Liberty is more important than the
distribution of social and economic equalities.
Rawls rejects the idea of rights before justice –
principles of justice givit’s only possible to
make a right claim once there are principles
of justice. e rights – so
20. Nozick focus’ on distribution of property.
Justice involves three ideas:
1) In acquisition – how you acquire property
rights if something hasn’t previously been
owned.
2) In transfer – how you acquire property
rights over something transferred – i.e. a
gift.
3) Rectification of injustice – how to restore
something to its rightful owner in case of
injustice.
21. Whether a distribution is just depends on how it
came about.
On the other hand justice according to – Rawls, need, desert and
equality depend on the ‘pattern’ of distribution.
An advantage
If a certain distribution is just, then if people
voluntarily move to a different distribution,
observing justice in transfer will also be just
(regardless of whether it is patterned according
to need, desert, equality and Rawls).
If a footballer wants to get 25p from every match
ticket sold, although they will be better off it is
still just as the fans voluntarily paid an extra 25p.
22. Justice is respecting natural rights-their rights to
property and self-ownership. We must allow
people to do what they want with what they own.
People are autonomous, they own themselves and
their talents so they own what they create. It’s
wrong to tax on what they earn. Rawls might say
– its luck as to what your given in order to
succeed – if your given the winning hand in a
card game it’s pure luck.
To take property away from someone in order to
redistribute violates the individuals rights. –
property rights are important because they come
from self-ownership.
23. Everyone has a right to what they produce
because they own their own labour which
they invest. ‘Justice in acquisition’ constrains
when and how this happens – but once you
justly own something it’s all about justice in
transfer.
Patterned theories of distributive justice
restricts free action – if people can do as they
please with their property liberty upsets the
patterns.
24. Nozicks theory is controversial – it may justify
unequal distribution, not respect what they
deserve or need, and not give priority to those
worse off.
Rawls – what people own is down to social status
and natural talents – inequalities in ownership
are unjust. The rights people have cant be
decided before the principles of justice – it would
enable us to alter justice to suit our rights.
Nozick – each person’s talents and abilities are
their own – they have a right to keep what the
talents produce & gain – forcibly redistributing
this would fail to respect their autonomy.
25. He supposes any transfer if freely consented is
just – the rules governing the transfer should
be sensitive to different political values not
just liberty.
Individual liberty could be a goal to be pursued
– if property is important and justice rests on
liberty everyone needs sufficient property to
be free.
If we don’t start from a just beginning there is
no way to know if what people own is justly
theirs.