Who was John Rawls and what are his two main principles of Justice? Why did Rawls consider the basic structures of society to be the primary subject of his theory of justice? Read this on till the end to learn more about John Rawls and his principles of justice.
Who is John Rawls?
John Rawls was a famous American scholar of the liberal tradition. He is known for his deliberations on issues concerning moral and political philosophy. He has written extensively on the idea of justice, fairness, restructuring of society, economic redistribution, etc.
John Rawls and his theory of justice occupy a central position in law school discussions on Jurisprudence.
John Rawls’s theory of justice consists of two major principles chosen in a hypothetical original situation where people are free, equal, and rational beings. In this original situation, the basic structure and institutions of society are purportedly just.
By basic structures of society, Rawls means the major socio-political and economic institutions like the constitutional polity, market, family, private property, means of production, etc.
Why Basic Structures of a Society Matter?
In his theory of Justice, Rawls gives much credence to the basic structures of society because these institutions determine the division of advantages from social cooperation.
Put differently, they define people’s rights and liabilities and influence their life prospects.
John Rawls Theory of Justice
John Rawls’s theory of justice comprises of two main principles. While the first principle addresses the issue of basic civil and political rights, the second one deals with socio-economic inequalities.
In other words, the first principle to some extent seems to be inclined to the idea of negative rights and the second one to the idea of positive rights and obligations.
Of these two principles of justice, the first principle takes precedence over the second.
John Rawls First Principle of Justice
John Rawls’ first principle of justice states that every citizen should have a claim to a set of equal basic liberties.
Further, the liberties of one individual should be compatible with the liberties of another. Simply put, one’s liberty must not encroach upon another liberty.
Rawls enumerated these basic liberties to include the basic fundamental rights like freedom of speech and expression, association, religion, etc.
Interestingly, in addition to basic civil and political rights, they also include the right to a basic income and the right to vote.
John Rawls Second Principle of Justice
John Rawls’ second principle of justice contains two parts.
The first part states that socio-economic institutions must guarantee fair equality of opportunities for competition to public offices and employments.
The second part states that inequalities arising out of social and economic institutions must be arranged in a manner so as to the least advantaged members of society in the best possible manner.
Of these two postulates under principle two, the first one takes precedence over the other.
These two principles of John Rawls theory of justice can be combined into three points in the following order of precedence-
- That every citizen should be equally entitiled to a set of basic rights and liberties;
- That everyone should have equal opportunity to compete for public offices; and
- Socio-economic inequalities must work for the benefit of the least advantaged members of society.
John Rawls Original Position
John Rawls’s ‘Original Position’ is a hypothetical situation where people would choose the principles of Justice. This original position connotes a situation where basic structures of society are just.
Under this original position, people would be under “a veil of ignorance” about their race, gender, social class, and every other arbitrary marker that leads to socio-economic disparities and injustices.
This ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances, argues Rawls.
John Rawls Veil of Ignorance
John Rawls says that everyone in the original situation would be under a veil of ignorance about his socio-economic status.
The underlying rationale if everyone is unaware of their socio-economic status, they would invariably choose such principles of justice which are fair and just.
According to Rawls, “since all are similarly situated and no one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain”.
What is John Rawls Justice as Fairness?
By justice as fairness, John Rawls means that his principles of justice are chosen in a situation that is fair.
In other words, it is the hypothetical original situation where everyone would be under a veil of ignorance about his status, background, and all other arbitrary markers.
Rawls argues that in this initial position that is fair and just, people would choose the first principle of justice concerning basic civil and political rights which everyone would be equally entitled to.
This first principle of justice, Rawls believes “is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions”.
Rawls probably believes that having secured equal rights and liberties in the original situation that is just and fair, people would necessarily establish socio-political institutions and edifices that are also just and fair to everyone.
John Rawls Difference Principle
The second part of the second principle of justice deals with the difference principle.
The difference principle provides that socio-economic inequalities are just only if “they result in compensating benefits for everyone”, and in particular to the least advantaged members of society.
Put differently, unequal social and economic advantages are justified only if
- They benefit everyone
- They are attached to offices and positions open to all.
Similarly, less than extensive liberty is also acceptable as long as it strengthens the overall system of liberty.
Criticism of John Rawls
John Rawls has been accused of abstractions and hypothecation in formulating his theory of justice.
One criticism is that Rawls presumes that if the basic structures of society are just, society will also be just.
Another criticism is that he did not negate the unequal distribution of socio-economic benefits in certain situations.
Though in his second principle of justice, Rawls emphasized equal distribution of socio-economic benefits, he did not see any harm in unequal distribution of wealth provided it is advantageous to everyone and it is attached to offices open to all.
Is it not like a dog owner throwing a few bones to a tail-waggling dog after enjoying a sumptuous meal?
No, because the dog had no equal opportunity to have the same sumptuous meal as the owner was having.
The second part of Rawls’s second principle of Justice accepts unequal distribution only if such benefits arose out of public offices and positions open to all.
Nonetheless, John Rawls’s theory of justice assumes significance in the philosophical debates on the redistribution of advantages and economic benefits arising out of social cooperation.
Read more
