ipl-logo

John Rawls Veil Of Ignorance Analysis

852 Words4 Pages

In 1971, A Theory of Justice by John Rawls was published. In this novel, Rawls aims to solve the problem of distributive justice through social contracts. Rawls’ theories center around the unknown for instance Rawl poses the question which principles of justice, or ways of governing would we submit to if we did not know who we were or were going to be. This introduces the concept of the veil of ignorance. The veil of ignorance’s key purpose is to erase from a person’s mind who they are, meaning their race, sex, beliefs, and social class. Rawls theory of Justice relies on two principles, the first Principle of Equal liberties, and the second Difference principle. In today’s society Rawls’s theory of the Veil of Ignorance would better promote …show more content…

Rawl describe the veil of ignorance as a tool that aims to allow people only to know how a general society works, and helps people choose rational principles of justice based on universal morals. Rawls theorized that the veil of ignorance allows people to erase their bias and come to unanimous agreements because no one is in a position to make any principles of justice tailored to the natural lottery of life, in other words the only way one can determine if a choice, or action is moral is if they don’t know how it affect them.

Rawls theory of justice introduces two principles which his theory is dependent on. The first principle states: “each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others” (Rawls 60). The main concept Rawls conveys is that behind the veil of ignorance the individual does not know there advantage so, that person will try to strive towards …show more content…

Healthcare is a prime example of Rawls theory of distributive justice in the everyday world, although the U.S. is still catching up on the idea of universal healthcare, in Europe it is the standard. Citizens that work is taxed a certain percentage every month, while workless citizens are covered through a healthcare program sponsored by their government, which operate off taxes, and donations. Doctors’ visits and test essentially cost nothing for the patient. Although health and health care are not directly covered in Rawls theory of Justice, modern day philosophers and healthcare advocates cite his theories to elevate their arguments. Applying his two principles to Justice to healthcare, as Norman Daniel formulates questions and answers using Rawls theory to which about the morality of universal healthcare like, “Are people entitled to a certain level of healthcare? According to Rawl the answer to this question, to be moral, has to be answer behind the veil of ignorance.
To conclude, A Theory of Justice by John Rawls presents valid and creditable solutions to figuring out what government for a society is the best. These solution can be credited to the principles of justice created behind the veil of ignorance. Although Rawls only applies distributive justice to aspects that were important at the time the theory of justice was written, the concept of distributive justice can be

Show More
Related
199 Words | 1 Pages

“There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” This quote from Elie Wiesel, who is the author of the best selling book Night and who himself survived the greatest injustice, the holocaust (Bio. Com), addresses an effective method to fighting injustice, protesting, which is found in both the readings on Socrates and Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter From Birmingham Jail. But what causes injustice so that “there may be times when we are powerless to prevent” it? From my desire to address the primary cause of injustice, resulted my thesis that ignorance anywhere is injustice everywhere.

Read More
1756 Words | 8 Pages

It is expected that a judge’s decisions be unbiased, but by allowing social identities to be present in decision making would cause this to be not only implausible, but practically impossible. The major criticism seems to develop from her disagreement with the statement “a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases” (Alcoff 122). To me, this statement seems to imply that judges and justices are under the impression that they invoke the ideal version of John Rawl’s ‘veil of ignorance’, a thought experiment in which Rawls implores us to imagine we are in a rational, conscious state before we have any perception of what sort of circumstances we will be living in; among other things, this is to help make laws fair for everyone. Basically, judges and justices who agree with the statement above seem to think they are making decisions and coming to unbiased conclusions from behind a veil of ignorance. However, they are not exactly achieving this, in fact is seems that it is beyond the bounds of possibility.

Read More
208 Words | 1 Pages

What this tells us about life is people that doubt you will sometimes never be somewhere in life. For example In the Sonia Sotomayor novel it's explaining how Sonia grew up in a different kind of neighborhood and today she is more and a successful lady. In the “The Road Not Taken” the Narrator took the road that is less traveled by and maybe when he took that road it could of changed his whole life into something good or bad but the more important thing is he took a difficult decision. The roads that were given to Sonia were good and perfect colleges and she believed that schools in the poor neighborhoods made progress since she was in the fifth grade.

Read More
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
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
1048 Words | 5 Pages

In our society, people are either born rich and powerful, having the rights and opportunities that those who are born into lower-class would not have. So why should we live in a government system where we allow these inequities to happen? In Justice, Michael J. Sandel discusses John Rawls’ arguments over defining a just society. Rawls believes that “we should reject the contention that the ordering of institution is always defective because the distribution of natural talents and the contingencies of social circumstance are unjust, and this injustice must inevitably carry over to human arrangements. Occasionally this reflection is offered as an excuse for ignoring injustice, as if refusal to acquiesce in injustice is on par with being unable to accept death.

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
256 Words | 2 Pages

Mass incarceration of minorities has been considered one of the numerous pressing issues of civil rights. Public policies, criminal justice officials, lawmakers, and the media has contributed to this issue. Issues underlying this injustice include other injustices such as racism, class inequalities and inequalities in education. In turn, the injustice of mass incarceration of minorities also play minor and major roles in disproportionate effects on employment, housing, and standard of living. Rawls believed that society cannot be organized in a way which disadvantages the worst off.

Read More
785 Words | 4 Pages

“in conflict theory, all social arrangements… have a political and economic bases and consequences” (p.10, Clarke) It is evident that health care is no stranger to this concept of class structures and the inequalities that are result from it. The government makes all the major decisions and implements the rules in regulations when it comes to health care. While individuals with low socio-economic statuses feel abandoned and suffer from the

Read More
129 Words | 1 Pages

Combining all the arguments together, Ellison’s narrative is a personal illustration of the many negative effects discrimination and racism has on the African American youth that may lead to a worse off society, but a stasis of status quo eliminates any chance for change. He establishes discrimination to primarily at fault of adults both White and Black, and, due to the lack of change, it is better off to ignore the suffering. However, he fails to acknowledge the consequences produced from ignoring a problem, and, should tackling discrimination and racism be taken actively, then the issues he had argued previously, such as how discrimination forced Black children into ill-labor, may be dissolved. In the end, nevertheless, the narrative conveys

Read More
1591 Words | 7 Pages

Political theorists, whether they are realists, or liberalists, over the centuries, have come into conflict over what they believe to be the utmost important task of the state. Hobbes believes the most important task of the state is to ensure law and order, rooting his argument in the idea of a sovereign ruler. On the other hand, Rawls, a modern theorist, firmly believes that a state should focus on realising justice within their society. While a utopian society cannot be achieved by either of these theories, I will highlight why Rawls was right in his assumption that the main focus of a state should be to ensure justice for all within their nation, through analysing and comparing the conflicting arguments of Hobbes and Rawls.

Read More
741 Words | 3 Pages

Healthcare in the United States is in desperate need of reform. There are several rationales to further explain this proposition. As an illustration, the Declaration of Independence states our unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In other words, every individual should be entitled to healthcare as it preserves life and promotes the general welfare. The federal government should, therefore, enact a program of universal health to better protect and serve all of its citizens.

Read More
1102 Words | 5 Pages

In Rawls’ paper, “Two Concepts of Rules”, he sheds light on fact that a distinction between justifying a practice and actions that fall under said practice, must be made. This distinction, according to Rawls is crucial in the debate between Utilitarianism and Retributivism, more specifically in defending the Utilitarian view against common criticisms, which will be addressed further in this essay. This essay will be examining the troubling moral question that Rawls addresses; The subject of punishment, in the sense of attaching legal penalties to the violation of legal rules. Rawls acknowledges that most people hold the view that punishing, in broad terms, is an acceptable institution. However, there are difficulties involved with accepting

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
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 John Rawls Veil Of Ignorance Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document