John Rawls

?
When was John Rawls life?
1921-2002
1 of 33
Who was he?
Harvard Philosophy professor
2 of 33
What was his book called?
A Theory of Justice (1971)
3 of 33
Who said "political philosophers must now either work with Rawls' philosophy or explain why not"
Nozick (1974)
4 of 33
What is at the core of Rawls' liberalism?
A strong synthesis of classical individual liberties and socio-economic equality
5 of 33
How is it differently described in America and the UK?
USA: liberal/left-liberal UK: socio-democratic
6 of 33
What is the difference between it and classical liberalism?
Not choosing between liberty and equality
7 of 33
What was Rawls' aim?
To provide a superior alternative to utilitarianism to seek justice
8 of 33
How did Rawls explain justice?
How wealth, jobs and access to places such as hospitals and schools etc. across society and to be concerned with civil liberties, political liberties etc.
9 of 33
How does Rawls understand utilitarianism?
As a teological theory of justice
10 of 33
What are the two features of such a theory?
1: they start with a definition of 'the good', prior to any notion of 'the right' 2: they describe the right as maximisation if the good aggregated across society
11 of 33
Why was Rawls against utilitarianism?
1: the separateness of persons (the problem with the aggregated pot) 2: the blindness to distribution 3: offensive tastes
12 of 33
What does Rawls argue that we need?
A deontological approach to justice
13 of 33
What is Nozick's book called?
Anarchy, State and Utopia (1974)
14 of 33
What is Cohen's book called?
Justice, freedom and market transactions
15 of 33
What is the first priority of a just society?
Equal liberties
16 of 33
What is the second priority of a just society?
Fair equality of opportunities
17 of 33
What is formal equality of opportunity?
Competition for jobs and positions; most qualified wins; no formal exclusion of members of any group
18 of 33
What is fair equality of opportunity?
Everything from formal equality plus elimination of the social class/family you were born into
19 of 33
What is the difference principle?
Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged
20 of 33
What is the difference principle like in practice?
Heavily progressive taxation, but also wide dispersal of capital across society and very high inheritance taxes
21 of 33
What is the original position?
A hypothetical thought experiment to illuminate what principles of justice would be chosen if we were all rational and reasonable persons; to render this reasonableness participants are placed behind a veil of ignorance
22 of 33
what is the veil of ignorance?
No one knows their place in society e.g. class, gender, race etc. nor their fortune or its distribution or any such thing about themselves
23 of 33
What is the Maximin?
Ordering society in such a way that social and economic inequalities are arranged so that "they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society"
24 of 33
What would rational participants in the original position choose?
The two principles
25 of 33
What do Harsanyi (1975) and Scheffler (2003) argue?
That we should have a thinner veil of ignorance eliminating a necessary condition for maximin whilst retaining impartiality
26 of 33
What is the intuitive argument?
Just societies strong limit, if not eliminate advantages that persons accumulate through no merit of their own
27 of 33
What do some argue is a difficulty of the veil of ignorance?
Exclusion of all information makes it hard to grasp what is meant by the original position
28 of 33
Some object to the veil of ignorance why?
Because they argue that some decisions should be made in light of all knowledge
29 of 33
What is Rawls' answer to this?
Everyone equally rational & similarly situated; so one can view the OP from any random person's perspective; as no one knows anything no one is in a position to tailor principles to their advantage; no coalitions b/c people don't know their interests
30 of 33
Who critiqued Rawls' theory?
Sandel (1984)
31 of 33
What did he say about it?
Dependent upon VofI allowing us to become unencumbered but we are encumbered to an extent that makes it impossible even hypothetically to have such a veil
32 of 33
How does Rawls respond?
The Theory of Justice is not a metaphysical one but a political one that allows for an overriding consensus even with individuals and groups with different morals and political views
33 of 33

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Who was he?

Back

Harvard Philosophy professor

Card 3

Front

What was his book called?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Who said "political philosophers must now either work with Rawls' philosophy or explain why not"

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

What is at the core of Rawls' liberalism?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Government & Politics resources:

See all Government & Politics resources »See all Contemporary Political Philosophy resources »