John Rawls’ Theory Of Justice
John Rawls in his book “A Theory of Justice” assumes that society is a more or less self sufficient association of persons, who in their mutual relations recognise as binding certain rules of conduct specifying a system of co-operation. Principles of social justice are necessary for making a rational choice between various available systems. The way in which a concept of justice specifies basic rights and duties will affect problems of efficiency. coordination and stability. This is why it is necessary to have a rational conception of justice. Practical rationality has three aspects, namely value, right and moral worth. John Rawls analyzed law on the basis that a rational person will pay for those things wanted badly enough. His theory rejects utilitarianism, which was based on maximizing happiness and constructs a social contract aimed at establishing principles of justice. Free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests adopt principles of justice, which define the basis of their association.
His analysis is purely hypothetical. It holds that the concept of the rational choice as one that could help our understanding of what justice might require. In practice, all human beings are born into a particular society with no option.
In making the hypothetical choice. Rawls insisted that the individual should operate behind a “Veil of Ignorance” where they do not know their sex, class, religion or social position or whether they are strong, clever or stupid, the state or period in history in which they exist. Rawls then predicted that any such society would exhibit two essential features.
1. People in the original position would agree that each person should have an equal right to certain basic liberties, such as freedom of person. freedom of speech and thought, freedom to participate in government, and freedom to possess property, to the greatest extent compatible with the enjoyment of the same basic liberties by others.
2. Social and economic inequalities, and differences of treatment, would be acceptable only in so far as they were available in principle to anyone, and were for the benefit of the least well off members of the society. Rawls suggests that you imagine yourself in an original position behind a vell of Ignorance. Behind this vell, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes.
Thus, for example people would agree that doctors should be paid higher than average incomes, because this would encourage able people to qualify as doctors and so benefit everyone in the long run.
On ‘lifting the veil’, anyone could be at the bottom of the social hierarchy. Rawls considers that there are two principles of justice namely; liberty and equality, and they would select liberty over equality. Liberty (ensures an equal right to basic liberties). Equality (economic and social inequalities arranged for the benefit of the least advantaged, and equality of opportunity).
Rawls is criticized for not explaining why liberty would be selected before equality or why natural talents to be treated as collective assets.