ipl-logo

Analysis Of Thomas Hobbes A Theory Of Justice

1937 Words8 Pages

Thomas Hobbes famously said that in the "state of nature", human life would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short". Without law and order, everyone would have the freedom to do as they pleased and thus lead to anarchy; there would be an endless war of all against all. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) To avoid this, free men made contracts with each other to establish political communities i.e. civil society through a social contract in which they all gain security . In his book A Theory of Justice (1972). He outlines two different principles for justice as fairness, the liberty principal and the difference principal. Although many philosophers discredit Rawls’ principles, his writing has begun a renewed, lively dialogue about civil …show more content…

I will discuss further how he manages to do this and comment on the significance of his contribution and the responses to the different perspectives used.

“Life is unfair” objection: In 1980, as Ronald Reagan ran for president, the Noble-prize winning economist Milton Friedman published a bestselling book, co-authored with his wife, Rose, called “Free to Choose.” It was a spirited and unapologetic defence of the free-market economy, and it became a textbook, even an anthem, for the Regan years. Public TV produced a TV series on the basis of the book, starring Friedman that is now freely available on the internet. While defending laissez-faire principles against egalitarian objections, Friedman made a surprising concession. He acknowledged that those who grow up in wealthy families and attend elite schools have an unfair …show more content…

For example, proponents of a highly unequal and competitive market economy may argue that the abundance of wealth produced by their preferred system contributes to the absolute standard of living of the poorest people in society. Critical Survey of Literature (2005) On the other hand, advocates of a highly redistributionist economy can maintain that radical redistribution of wealth will provide the greatest support for the poorest. Because no one can know—behind a veil of ignorance—which system would lead to the best possible lives for the poor, there can be no way of deciding what kind of society should be preferred. Rawls (1971). Rawls assumes that the society in question is under reasonably favourable conditions: that there are enough resources for it to be possible for everyone 's basic needs to be met. Rawls makes the assumption that the society is self-sufficient .He confines his attention mainly to ideal theory, leaving questions such as those of criminal justice out... Rawls obtains his account of primary goods based on the idea that all citizens are equal. Primary goods are: The basic rights and liberties; Freedom of movement, and free choice among a wide range of

Show More
Related
246 Words | 1 Pages

Despite the the lecturer says that the description of Glen Canyon and Lake Powell are true, he casts doubts on some of the arguments in favor of draining the lake. Therefore, he thinks that the lake should be drained for three main reasons. Firstly, the lecturer differs from the assumption that if drained, tourism in the lake could be affected and it directly damages a substantial source of revenue for the people that work with tourism in the lake. He explains that before the lake was formed, Glen was a Canyon, like Grand Canyon.

Read More
1416 Words | 6 Pages

I gathered a lot of evidence throughout Patrick Shanley’s play, Doubt: A Parable, and I conclude that Father Flynn is guilty due to Donald being a very easy target and Father Flynn acting is very odd ways. Donald Muller, the little boy in the story, seems to be a very easy target for a predator. Donald is very isolated in school. He does not have any friends, so he the fact that the priest would accept him would make him feel accepted in the school. Donald is also the only black boy within the entire school.

Read More
901 Words | 4 Pages

I will talk about John Rawls’ philosophy and two major critiques made to his work by G.A. Cohen John Rawls was born in Baltimore in 1921. He was always concerned about poverty in the United States and wanted to change the society he lived in. He wrote his most famous book A Theory of Justice in 1971. This book is considered the most important book in American philosophy after the World War II. John Rawls philosophy is based on his vision of justice.

Read More
1483 Words | 6 Pages

“So the first question we’re interested is what do people think is the wealth distribution in the U.S. and we basically asked them to say how much do you think of the Wealth is owned by the top 20 percent, the next 20 percent, the next 20. And what we found was that people dramatically. Underestimated how much wealth the wealthy have, but also dramatically overestimate how much money poor have. The second question we’re interested in was if you gave people the right to design the distribution of wealth in the U.S., how would it look like? You know, we often think about distribution of wealth in the question of efficiency, of the

Read More
1790 Words | 8 Pages

Rawls was not happy whit the original arguments about what makes a social institution just. The utilitariam argument says that societies should pursue the greatest good for the greatest number. This argument has many problems, excpecially that it seems to be consistant with the belief of majorities over minorities. The institution argument holds that human intuit what is wright or wrong by some innate moral sense. Rawls attempts to provide a good account of social justice through the social contract approach.

Read More
999 Words | 4 Pages

As much as people hate to admit it, society and the world revolves around money. Whether someone wants to go to college, own a house, support a family, live luxurious etc all these things are dependent on wealth. So, knowing that the top one percent wealthiest people in the U.S owns more than the other ninety-nine percent combined is a little terrifying, and it’s partly due to the income inequality in the U.S. When there are people supporting their families on minimum wage and no one has taken action it’s time for a change. So, when it comes to the subject of wealth everyone will agree that is necessary to live. Where this consensus ends, however, is whether income inequality actually exists.

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
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
1500 Words | 6 Pages

People for hundreds of years have asked what makes a just and fair society. One person who endeavored to answer this question was Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes claimed that freedom was good but security is better. He also believed that without government, laws, and society mankind would exist in a state of nature where life would be nasty, brutish, and short. To solve this problem Hobbes believed in creating a social contract and hand over their freedoms to a strong leader.

Read More
1441 Words | 6 Pages

Both social contract philosophers defended different views about moral and political obligations of men living in the state of nature stripped of their social characters. The state of nature illustrates how human beings acted prior to entering into civil society and becoming social beings living under common legitimacy. The state of nature is to be illustrated as a hypothetical device to explain political importance in the society. Thomas Hobbes, propounded politics and morality in his concept of the state

Read More
426 Words | 2 Pages

Imagine living in a world absent of rules, laws and regulations where each person was left to fend for themselves. Everyone had freedom but no one had security. People were dishonest, selfish, treacherous and when necessary even violent without the fear of justice. According to the philosopher Thomas Hobbes, this is exactly what our world would like if it was absent of a government. Hobbes believed that in a state of a nature, there is no comfort, code or culture and for those reasons the only way that we could properly live a pleasant life in unity with one another, would be with the use of a social contract.

Read More
838 Words | 4 Pages

Summary Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) theory of social contract, which states that we need moral, legal rules because we want to escape the state of nature which is solitary, poor, brutal, nasty, and short. In this state, a man can kill others, and there are limited resources. This can soon lead to a state of war in which we are constantly disposed to harm others to achieve our goals. So, in this state of war if a person was to possess a beautiful house or property, and had all the comforts, luxuries, and amenities to lead a wonderful life; others could come and harm him and deprive him of his fruit of labor, life, and liberty. Therefore, the state of nature is that of fear, violence, and distrust.

Read More
913 Words | 4 Pages

This in turn could result in anarchy or social tumult. Many individuals living in challenging conditions or times who have natural talents and abilities most likely would want to keep their benefits in order to help improve the situation they are in. Such people would certainly be unwilling to share their talents with the less fortunate. Rawls disregards this fact, believing that the ones with the natural abilities live in a great environment while the ones who do not carry that ability live in a horrible and corrupted environment.

Read More
1821 Words | 8 Pages

On the other hand, while philosopher Robert Nozick paid a generous tribute to the brilliance of Rawls’ philosophical construction, he provides a rejection to Rawls’ claims from a libertarian perspective. Libertarians have the desire to divide and limit power. That is, government will be limited generally through a written constitution limiting the powers that the people delegate to government (Boaz, 2015). Nozick stated that Rawls’ idea would have resulted in the restriction of free choice or forced distribution within the society.

Read More

More about Analysis Of Thomas Hobbes A Theory Of Justice

Related Topics

Open Document