ABSTRACT
John Rawls’ “A theory of justice” published in 1971,
changed contemporary political theory. In the book, John Rawls presented
a reformulation of the social contract theory of John Locke, Jean
Jacque Rosseau and Immanuel Kant, providing a justification of the
liberal state.
According to John Rawls, parties to a contract in
an original position would accept two principles of justice to regulate
the basic structure of society. The two principles are;
1 Each
person is to have an equal right to the most extensive system of equal
liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.
Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both;
A) To the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just saving principle
B) Attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
The
second principle being my point of focus, can be better understood in
two categories, which are; fair equality of opportunity and the
difference principle.
John Rawls second principle of justice can be seen as a distributive justice.
The
aim of this work is to critically examine John Rawls second principle
of justice, looking at the positive and negative aspects of the second
principle of justice according to John Rawls.
The method that
will be employed will be the analytic critical method because that will
seem as the best method if one is to properly analyse John Rawls second
principle of justice and thoroughly criticize it.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Certification
Dedication
Acknowledgement
Abstract
Table of content
CHAPTER ONE:
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Background of study
Statement of problem
Scope of study
Purpose of study
Significance of study
Method of study
Literature review
Endnotes
CHAPTER TWO
WHAT LEAD TO JOHN RAWLS SECOND PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE.
2.1 The original position
2.2 The veil of ignorance
2.3 Principles accepted
Endnotes
CHAPTER THREE
JOHN RAWLS’ SECOND PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE
3.1 Distributive justice
3.2 Fair equality of opportunity
3.3 The difference principle
3.4 The system conducive to the realization of the second principle of justice.
Endnotes
CHAPTER FOUR
CRITIQUE OF JOHN RAWLS’ SECOND PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE
4.1 Positive critique on John Rawls’ second principle of justice
4.2 Negative critique on John Rawls’ second principle of justice
End notes
CHAPTER FIVE
5.1 Summary
5.2 Evaluation
5.3 Conclusion
Endnotes
Bibliography
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
In
the history of philosophy, the issue of justice has always been a
serious debate. The debate is all about what the concept ‘justice’ means
and how it can be attained in a society. Thrasymachus, an ancient Greek
philosopher, equated justice with ‘‘might is right’’. According to
Christopher Stolleri, ‘’Justice is a concept that is balanced between
law and morality’’1. Morality has to do with the rightness or wrongness
of an action. Laws are laid down principles that guide a society and
they can be used for the good or bad of a nation’s citizens. For Joseph
Omoregbe, ‘’the foundation of Justice is the fundamental equality of all
men’’2. Justice is applied in a society so that there will be peace and
harmony in the society. A society is an aggregate of people living
together in a more or less ordered community.
From this, various philosophers gave their various theories of how justice can be attained in the society.
Socrates,
a Greek philosopher, felt that justice can be attained in a society
when wisdom is employed. For Plato, it is when philosophers are kings in
the society. According to Karl Marx, a just society is a classless
society which he referred to as communism. John Stuart Mill and Jeremy
Bentham are of the view that we arrive at a just society when the
society acts to provide ‘’the greatest good for the greatest number’.
John
Rawls provided his own theory of justice by criticizing the utilitarian
view of justice because it can be abused, leading to the ‘’tyranny of
the majority’’ (Nazi Germany’s mistreatment of the Jews and the United
States mistreatment of African Americans)3. Rawls’ approach guards
against this common source of injustice.
Principles of justice
are the principles that rational and free persons that are concerned to
further their interests would accept in an initial position of equality
as defining fundamentals of the term of their association.4 In his book,
‘A Theory of Justice’, like Plato, Rawls imagines a political society
structured on principles of justice, a just society where nobody
complains of injustice, a society governed by principles of justice.
From
the above, John Rawls came up with his own idea of a just society by
providing two principles that can guide a society to attain the state of
a just society. He did this by giving a theory of the people in the
original position wearing a veil of ignorance that they would not be
partial. One of John Rawls’ primary aim was to set forth the appropriate
moral conception that was better suited to interpreting the democratic
values of freedom and equality than the reigning utilitarian tradition.
It
is in the light of this background that my research intends to
critically analyze the principles that John Rawls gave to guide us to a
just society. In order to achieve this, I shall consider the following:
the people of the original position, the veil of ignorance and the
principles accepted, mainly focusing on his second principle of
justice.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The second
principle states that: social and economic inequalities are to be
arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest benefit of all the
least advantaged, consistent with the just saving principle, (b)
attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair
equality of opportunity.
Various problems arise, for instance,
can there ever really be equal opportunities given the fact that nature
itself is not equal? Is it fair for things to be shared equally when
people do not give the same quota to the society? How do the individuals
gain possession of goods?
Although John Rawls’ principle of
justice is an improvement from some other solutions to the problem of
justice, the question is, can we say that John Rawls’ second principle
of justice is adequate in guiding a society to a state where it can be
regarded as a just society? Can it be universally accepted? These
questions are the core areas of this study.
1.3SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This
study will focus primarily on John Rawls’ second principle of justice,
but before then, I shall view the steps that led to accepting the
principle and I shall also give a critique of John Rawls’ second
principle of justice.
Although my research will be far and wide,
the scope of this study however shall be limited entirely on John Rawls
second principle of justice.
1.4PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This
study aims at providing better understanding of John Rawls second
principle of justice, by analyzing it. There will also be a critique of
John Rawls’ second principle of justice so that the tenability of the
principle can be assessed. By understanding John Rawls’ second principle
of justice better and viewing the various critiques, we can finally be
able to evaluate and pass a judgment if it can really guide a society to
becoming a just society.
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
This
study helps to give a full understanding of John Rawls’ second principle
of justice, taking note of its positive and negative side without
accepting it dogmatically. Rawls argues that his principles of justice
should be used to assess the justice of actual social institutions, such
as political government that govern human being.
We can decide
if John Rawls’ second principle can guide a society into a just society.
With this project, after critically analyzing John Rawls’ second
principle of justice, we can decide for ourselves if it is the answer to
the problem of our present day society or if it is just another theory
to be disregarded.
1.6 METHOD OF STUDY
In this project, I
shall employ the analytical cum critical method. I shall rely on data
collection from text books, articles, journals, the internet and any
other source relevant to this project topic. This method will help us to
fully understand John Rawls’ second principle of justice and pose some
critical question.
1.7 LITERATURE REVIEW
The first book
reviewed is authored by John Rawls himself, titled “Theory of Justice’’
published in 1971 by Harvard University Press. I reviewed this book for
the obvious reason that it was written by John Rawls himself. This book
gave us a firsthand view of John Rawls’ principle of justice.
Another
book reviewed is by Samuel Freeman titled “Rawls” published in 2007 by
Freeman, projected an understanding of Rawls’ work. He gave attention to
every detail and this is as a result of his awareness of the overall
structure of the theory and the philosophical significance of Rawls’
grand strategy.
I also reviewed a book by Joseph Omoregbe titled
“Social-Political Philosophy and International Relations” published in
2007 Lagos. This book gave an in depth meaning of justice, it also
emphasized the idea of distributive justice in which John Rawls second
principle of justice can be classified under. From there, Omoregbe
breaks down John Rawls’ idea of the principle of justice.
Another
book that was reviewed is by Paul Graham titled “Rawls” published in
2007 by One World thinkers. In this book, Paul Graham gave his own
interpretation and understanding of John Rawls’ work.
I also
reviewed a book by Stumpf and Abel titled “Elements of philosophy”
published in 2002 by McGraw-Hill. This book gives a clear and simple
explanation of John Rawls’ book. “A theory of justice”, give extracts
from the book.
Another of Joseph Omoregbe’s book “A Simplified
History of Western Philosophy” was also reviewed. It was published in
1991 at Ikeja, Lagos. This book gave a more elaborate understanding of
John Rawls principles of justice, by giving us the four systems which
Rawls examine to see which of them is conducive to the realization of
the second principle which demands that the least advantaged the poor,
is always favoured by any change or socio-economic arrangement in
society.