ipl-logo

Analyze Whether The Same Principles Of Distributive Justice Apply Globally?

1889 Words8 Pages

In this essay, I shall critically discuss and analyse whether the same principles of distributive justice that apply within nation-states, should also apply globally. In doing so, I will focus on the work of Rawls (1971), particularly, his difference principle. I will point out that, although Rawls developed his theory with a narrow application in mind, namely, within the nation-state, he does have a strong concern for the welfare of individuals. It is out of this concern for individuals that the difference principle arises, which can be seen as a response to the unequal distribution of things such as the natural abilities and personality traits of individuals. For Rawls, although such traits impact upon one's quality of life, they are, morally …show more content…

I shall draw upon Singer's position when analysing some of Rawls's objections to applying the difference principle globally, objections that, in the end, I consider to be unsuccessful. Ultimately, I will reject Rawls's position that the difference principle ought not to be applied globally, arguing that, just as our natural abilities are arbitrary from a moral point of view, the geographical location and society one is born into is equally arbitrary. And, if as Rawls does, we consider people to possess moral worth equally, then, the application of principles of distributive justice, such as the difference principle, ought to be extended from being applied solely within the nation-state, to being applied …show more content…

For Singer, morality requires us to take the welfare of all individuals seriously, that is, each person matters as much as anyone else, and this is so regardless of things such as race, sex, geographical location, or the nation-state one is a member of (Barry *9; Singer FAM *4-5, 10). As far as Singer is concerned, each of these characteristics is just as arbitrary as the other, and what ultimately matters is the welfare of individuals and the prevention of suffering. Singer's argument is as follows: suffering and death from things such as a lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad, and, if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing something of comparable moral significance, then we ought to do it (Singer FAM *4). It is important to note that Singer says we should do something to help, as long as doing so does not cost us something that is morally comparable. By this he means that, if, for instance, I aim to prevent others from starving to death, I should do so unless my actions will cause me, or others, to suffer in a way that is morally comparable. For example, if my contributing to food aid results in me not being able to adequately feed myself, then I would have a morally significant reason to

More about Analyze Whether The Same Principles Of Distributive Justice Apply Globally?

Open Document