ipl-logo

Hayek's Theory Of Distributive Justice

1060 Words5 Pages

Hayek and Rawls take different paths along their journey to reach what they believe the proper form of distributive justice would be. They both follow liberal ideology, focusing more on the individual. Hayek follows a line of thinking based on liberty, utility, and a “economic order based on the market,” and with that with that economic order comes capitalism as the most viable option for the society (Hayek, LLL p.68). Hayek believes that this society will offer the best opportunities for access to the benefits that any society has to offer. Rawls takes another position on this subject, starting from the question of, “what is the best conception of justice for a democratic society” Rawls answers that question by forming an argument for justice …show more content…

He believes that all people in a society are free, equal, and have a drive for cooperation with each other. Once the grounding principles are put into place, then the Original Position acts as a filtering device for Rawls’s principles. The Original Position takes under it “the veil of ignorance,” which helps to block a person’s past and biases, allowing them to choose the best principles for all. From the “veil of ignorance” gets the principles equal basic rights for all, equality of opportunity, and the difference principle. The first principle “requires equality in basic rights and duties, while the second holds that social and economic inequalities...are just only if they result with compensating benefits...particularly for the least well off” (Rawls, TJ p.13). Rawls, through the difference principle, is giving priority to the least well off of a society, and this would be Rawls’ distributive justice. He believes because every member of society is free and equal we are all entitled the benefits from society, and also have a society where the least well off are brought up to the highest degree. Rawls believes that social cooperation in a democratic society is the major component to making the most beneficial society for all. Rawls criticizes utilitarianism as focusing too much on society being a “forum for the coordination of activities,” while society is based off connections and the cooperation between citizens (Platz, Rawls p.1). Hayek also focuses on laws that would make the

Show More
Related
764 Words | 4 Pages

Rawls states that equality of opportunity represents, “… the background institutions of social and economic justice,” that help those who are most disadvantaged (Rawls 288). Through his own story, Moore displays how education allows those who come from essentially nothing can achieve success. It gives, “… a reason to believe that a story of struggle apathy, and pain… can still have a happy ending,” (Moore 183). Rawls also believes in the, “… equal opportunities of education for all regardless of family income” (Rawls 286). Both see education not only as providing knowledge for all people, but also resources and role models, as the most direct and effective method for creating greater social equality within a

Read More
653 Words | 3 Pages

Rawls feels that the difference principle “permits income inequalities as just only if incentives and effort of the people who are at an advantage ultimately help the people who are at a disadvantaged (Sandel 2010, p.158). Therefore applying this principle to the wealthy resort owner is in line with Rawls difference principle because it doesn’t matter what Chuck Fowler makes in wealth, what matters is according to Rawls, “the basic structure of society” (Sandel 2010, p.152). Chuck Fowler in his original position, benefits the citizens that are not as well off as him. Setting aside Chuck Fowler’s income, the difference principle exerts his rights and duties, income and wealth, power and opportunity and permits that inequality as long as it is allocated to the

Read More
689 Words | 3 Pages

[3]In a thought experiment proposed by philosopher John Rawls, individuals are asked to imagine designing a just society under a veil of ignorance, a concept urging people to prioritize fairness and equality since they can't predict whether their social structures will advantage or disadvantage them. Similarly, [4]Dr. King stresses a fair and harmonious society in his "Letter from Birmingham Jail," except that he focuses on solving existing problems rather than creating a whole new society. The most fundamental difference between Dr. King and John Rawls is that Dr. King confronts a real problem that exists in a real society. In contrast, John Rawls only proposes a theoretical solution.

Read More
1790 Words | 8 Pages

This approach says that a society is in some sense is an agreement amount all those who make up the society. In the analogy Rawls shows his disagrements and gives solutions or what he things is a more just way of doing such things. Rawls starts off by saying “I believe that the contrast between the contract view and utilitarianism remains essentially the same in all these cases. There fore I shall compare justice as fairness with familiar variants of intuitionism, perfectionism, and utilitarianism in order to bring out the underlying difference in the simplest way.” Rawls strongly opposes utilitarianism.

Read More
1048 Words | 5 Pages

The natural distribution is neither just nor unjust; nor is it unjust that persons are born in society at some particular position” (Sandel 165). Rawls points out that our society has chosen to ignore the issue of inequity most of the time, so long that the effects of this indifference do not hurt their positions. Moreover, what Rawls has described in this quote is very much evident in our society. The citizens on top–especially upper class white males–have the power to pretend the inequities in American society don’t exist, therefore making our society unjust. More

Read More
775 Words | 4 Pages

Rawls’ idea of justice as fairness, which he presented in his book, “A Theory of Justice,” emphasizes the importance of equal opportunities and equal distribution of wealth and resources in society. This idea resonates with me because, as someone who values fairness and equality, I believe that everyone should have the same chance to succeed and live a fulfilling life. Rawls’ work has taught me to be more aware of societal inequalities and to work towards creating a fairer and more just

Read More
1591 Words | 7 Pages

Contrastingly, Rawls views democracy as the only way a state can realise justice. Citizens all need a say in how they live their lives and this improves their political lives in the state. Hobbes’ sovereign rule is flawed as he believes each citizen will give up rights and obey a single ruler who has the final say in all decisions. This type of society will eventually crumble, be it by revolution or distrust in the sovereign’s ability; displaying the total failure of law and order while oppressed citizens rise and

Read More
1273 Words | 6 Pages

When discussing dystopian fiction Yegevnys Zamyatin ’s We is one that has paved the way for works like Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, and many others. Moreover, in addition to the works mentioned Zamyatin has had specific ideas closely related to Marx and Lenin. With the absence of private property and a revolving door of revolutions it seems that conflict would have been eliminated However, the critiques of communism also agree with Svitak and Hayeks way of thinking. Conflict is not eliminated according to critics because the terror of individuals from the government and the lack of private property causes more harm than good.

Read More
1203 Words | 5 Pages

Friedrich A. Hayek is often rejected because of the ideological aspect of his most known works (Gamble, 1996), especially The Road to Serfdom. Nevertheless, he provides strong arguments within debates on whether markets and businesses should be regulated or not, or the traditional political left and right. In fact, as of late, his thought has become useful to investigate, considering the occurrence of the 2008 financial crisis, its consequences, the slow recovery that most western nations have experienced, and seemingly growing global wealth inequalities. He represents the liberal side of the fundamental opposition within political economy, and presents challenging arguments that this author finds should be assessed, as they

Read More
1102 Words | 5 Pages

If punishment can be shown to promote effectively the interest of society, then it is justifiable, otherwise it is not. Seeing as the main characteristic of Utilitarianism is to maximize utility (i.e happiness/good), it consequently follows that punishment should be applied when it leads to improved overall circumstances in a given situation. One main argument for punishment in the Utilitarian view, is that of the deterrent effect it has, hence, threatening potential offenders in order to discourage them from breaking the law. This places the practice of punishment under strictly preventative and deterrent means. In light of this, Rawls points to the shortcomings and common criticisms of the Utilitarian model for justifying punishment.

Read More
913 Words | 4 Pages

John Rawls believed that if certain individuals had natural talents, they did not always deserve the benefits that came with having these abilities. Instead, Rawls proposed, these inherent advantages should be used to benefit others. Although Rawls makes an excellent argument on why this should be the case, not all philosophers agreed with his reasoning, especially Robert Nozick. Nozick believed in distributing benefits in a fair manner in accordance with the Entitlement Theory, which has three subsections: Just Acquisition, Just Transfer and Just Rectification.

Read More
767 Words | 4 Pages

Martin Luther King being among them. All of these great thinkers stated that there must be a wrong in need of repair to call for such drastic actions. Rawls, in The Justification of Civil Disobedience, talks of what makes these wrongs or unjust laws by talking about what creates a just law. His view of just was routed strongly in equality which means unjust laws would be something that by nature or in application deviates from the equal treatment of people. Because the government is often dictated by the will of the majority King and Rawls would agree that injustice effects the minority of a society heavily and unequally.

Read More
1463 Words | 6 Pages

J RAWLS, The Laws of Peoples-with the Idea of Public Reason Revisited, Harvard University Press: USA, 1999. John Rawls was an influential political philosopher and his publications are widely read. One of which is the Law of Peoples published in 1993 which is the subject of my study. In the Law of Peoples Rawls concerns of the general principles whereby one can uphold and be accept by the liberal people as well as the non-liberal society. “This principle is a standard for which can be useful in regulating the behavior of the citizens towards one and other.”

Read More
742 Words | 3 Pages

THE PHILOSOPHY OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE SYSTEM Ashish Kumar Distributive Justice or Economic Justice or the Fair Share principle, as the name suggests, is basically concerned with the social and economic welfare of the citizens. It says that an equal society is that where there is a fair allocation of the material goods and services between all the sections of the society. John Rawls, the main theorist of Distributive Justice gives two basic principles of Fairness or Fair Share related to Distributive Justice. The Constitution of India, through Article 14, 15, 16, 38, 39, 39(A) enforces the principle of distributive justice. Distributive justice exists in a society where there exists no inequality, so the Indian constitution through these articles tries to remove the prevailing inequalities in the society.

Read More
1821 Words | 8 Pages

Distributive justice by definition deals with the distribution of benefits and burdens across members of a society. Over time, philosophers have argued how these benefits and burdens should be distributed as what results from them fundamentally affects people’s lives. John Rawls, an American moral and political philosopher argued as a liberal “Justice as Equality” by means of his three principles of justice: the principle of equal liberty, equal opportunity and difference. Liberals typically believe that government is necessary to protect individuals from harm by others, but also recognize that government itself can pose a threat to liberty (Minogue, Girvetz, Dagger & Ball, 2018). Rawls believed that everyone in society should have had equal political rights, although social and economic inequalities existed, but only under the condition that they were to the maximum advantage of the least advantaged people in society.

Read More

More about Hayek's Theory Of Distributive Justice

Related Topics

Open Document