John Rawls has a very interesting theory of justice. He has this idea called “justice as fairness”. This idea expresses that a group of people should decide together what is just and unjust. They should decide this using a situation that has not happened yet. Based upon the situation they can determine the things that are and are not just. He feels that this group of people should leave their religious beliefs, and social status out of their decisions. This is the best way to prevent anyone from being put higher than another. Rawls also brings up a point that if the groups of people are, to a certain extent, disinterested in the hypothetical situation they will be able to make a non-bias decision. He also brings up a point about a contract theory. The “contract view holds that certain principles would be accepted in a well-defined initial situation”. (Rawls 203) The contract is to set a standard for the things that are just and unjust. When the situation comes they can use the contract to define justice.
This idea sounds like a great plan. Every decision that we make is based upon our beliefs and our morals. To have us eliminate them would be very hard. I understand that it would promote equality among people, but in the end your personal thoughts about different things are always going to come into play. The contract that we are supposed to use to define justice is the Constitution and the laws. Sometimes that is not even good enough, because everyone has a different interpretation of the laws.
Rawls, John. “A Theory of Justice”. A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St Martin’s, 2006.pp 199-204
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think that you have a real good understanding on the read and i agree with most of your points, but mostly i agree with how you said you can really try anything but in the end your personal thoughts about different things are always going to come into play when making laws. Good Job
Post a Comment