Exam 25: John Rawls

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Write an essay critically examining one of the principles of justice that Rawls endorses. First, state the principle and briefly explain what it implies for the way society ought to be structured. Then present what you take to be the strongest objection to the principle. Do you find the principle plausible? Why or why not?

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls claims that a conception of justice ought to be deduced from self-evident premises.

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls follows economic theory and defines "rationality" as the taking of the most effective means to given ends.

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls states, "Injustice, then, is simply inequalities that are not to the benefit of all." Do you agree with this claim? Why or why not? How does this conception of injustice manifest itself in Rawls's theory?

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -How does Rawls think that one should go about justifying a conception of justice (whether his social contract conception, or any other)? How does his view contrast with other views about the justification of moral claims? Is the method that Rawls provides a plausible one?

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls maintains that a society satisfying his principles of justice comes as close as a society can to:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls claims that the concepts of justice and fairness are one and the same.

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls conceives of the original contract as one to:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -According to Rawls, the natural distribution of talents is:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -What is the principle of redress, and how does it inform Rawls's theory? Do you agree with the principle? Why or why not?

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -In his characterization of utilitarianism, Rawls claims that the two main concepts of ethics are:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -According to Rawls, in justifying a conception of justice we try to attain reflective equilibrium.

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls conceives of the parties in the original position as:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls claims that when his two principles come into conflict:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls's theory consists of two parts:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls objects to utilitarianism on the grounds that it does not take seriously the distinction between persons.

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -What objection does Rawls raise to classical utilitarianism? How does his theory differ from utilitarianism? Which do you think is preferable, and why?

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Rawls claims that a conception of justice should be justified by:

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -Behind the veil of ignorance, people have no knowledge of human psychology.

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice." Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy. -The original position is best conceived of as an assembly of possible persons.