ipl-logo

The Veil Of Justice Analysis

1573 Words7 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: John Rawls on equality and inequality

and his followers are uncomfortable in addressing. This accusation further evidenced by the fact that in his mammoth book a theory of Justice, not one mention of race is present. Mills states that if one asks the “classic question of cui bono? Then it is obvious that ideal theory can only serve the interests of the privileged.” The marginalization of race by the Rawlsian model, has led some to see that ideal theory is unhelpful in understanding one of the most noteworthy forms of injustice. This indictment would cripple any theory of justice. There is no corrective approach to the Rawlsian model as in, no way to pave a path for social justice. Therefore, there is no way to combat these incessant injustices.
Mills explains this implication …show more content…

In his experiment Rawls imagines a group of individuals assembled to design their just, future society. The future citizens do not know what position they will be in this new society. They must plan this new society behind what Rawls calls the Veil of Ignorance. This veil of ignorance stipulates that, “no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status; nor does he know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence and strength, and the like”. Furthermore, the people in this experiment do not know the culture, traditions and economic standing of this future society. It is important for Rawls theory of justice, and what constitutes as justice to be derived from this experiment of the veil. Rawls states that “if a man knew that he was wealthy, he might find it rational to advance the principle that various taxes for welfare measures be counted unjust; if he knew that he were poor, he would most likely propose the contrary principle. To represent the desired outcome, one must operate independent of such …show more content…

Mills writes, epistemology of ignorance is “…a particular pattern of localized and global cognitive dysfunctions (which are psychologically and socially functional), producing the ironic outcome that whites will in general be unable to understand the world they themselves have made”. In other words, there exists an implicit consensus about cognitive norms within a society. A consensus about how things should be. Indeed, epistemology of ignorance states that there is a specific interpretation of the world. Furthermore, there is a group within society that deems its interpretation of justice, as the correct interpretation. This interpretation is not according to all members of society, but only those powerful enough. Minorities within society either act in agreement with proposed interpretation, or they are regarded with suspicion. Agreement with the officially sanctioned reality allows some to be contractually granted some cognitive membership within the powerful community. If you follow the ‘official’ interpretation of reality or justice, then you are counted within the powerful group. Divergence from that interpretation will be regarded as inconsequential and dismissed. However, the endorsed view of reality is not the actual reality. There is a cognitive dysfunction that exists that Mills warns against- blindness in place to maintain the oppressive

Show More
Related
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
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
1293 Words | 6 Pages

In Need of a Government Handout There is probably no more a sensitive topic in America than that of race and the bonds of inequality. It has been known for some time that being a minority in America could cost you more than you are willing to pay. As a generation of progressives and millennials, it is common to bring difficult conversations to the forefront and have open dialogue about desired outcomes. This time is no different. I have been tasked with writing an essay that will open your minds while closing the doors on systemic racism in America.

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
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
560 Words | 3 Pages

In the novel, Invisible Man, the narrator is always in pursuance of justice. His consistent search is driven by his inability to be treated as an equal in this white man’s society. As he fought for justice for the “dispossessed” the Narrator was constantly faced with injustice. Although his success seemed positive in the eyes of others, it had a negative impact on his life as a whole.

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
1086 Words | 5 Pages

Often times we associate material gain with enjoyment and fulfillment, but we fail to understand the side most affected by the uninhibited pursuit of gratification. In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, the wealthy do just that; they climb the steps of social class by stepping over those who are poorer. In the novel, the lower class face degradation caused by the wealthy’s selfish desire for pleasure and satisfaction. Specifically, the Valley of Ashes symbolizes Fitzgerald’s criticism for that very inconsiderate pursuit of self-gain, which creates dire consequences for the poor.

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
969 Words | 4 Pages

Principles of Justice Reflective Equilibrium is Rawls’ attempt to argue that persons within society’s judgments are derived from a set of principles, namely principles of justice . These two principles of justice include: 1) Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others 2) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a) reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and b) attached to positions in offices open to all. Equal Liberty These principles are in order of importance, in the sense that it is not until the first principle is completely satisfied that the second principle can come into effect. These principles are not only concerned

Read More
1463 Words | 6 Pages

Race, ethnicity and class are all integrated in different ways throughout American history. Race refers to groups of individuals who have similarities and differences in biological traits believed to be socially significant by society. This ultimately means that individuals treat other individuals different due to these biological traits. For instance, differences in skin colour would be viewed as socially significant, whereas similarities or diversity in eye colour have not been seen as socially significant. “The state-sanctioned and/or legal production and exploitation of group-differentiated vulnerabilities to premature death, in distinct yet densely interconnected political geographies”.

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
609 Words | 3 Pages

When addressing the difference between just and unjust laws for the clergymen Martin Luther King Jr. stated, A just law is man-made code that squares with the mora law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law.

Read More

More about The Veil Of Justice Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document