Samenvatting
Samenvatting Rawls - Theory of Justice
- Vak
- Instelling
- Boek
Alle vereiste hoofdstukken voor het paper zijn samengevat. Referentie naar de paginanummers incl.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 24 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 24 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
Meer samenvattingen voor studieboek
-
Reading Guide for John Rawls "A theory of Justice" - Political philosophy
Verkoper
Volgenjacquelinevandervegte
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Chapter 1The role of justice
● Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot
override. For this reason justice Denies that the loss of Freedom for some is made right by a greater good
shared by others. It does not allow that sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of
advantages enjoyed by the many (Rawls.1971, p. 3-4)
● Therefore in a just society equal citizenship is regarded to be settled. The Rights secured by justice
are not subject to Political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests.
● Injustice is only tolerable is when it is necessary to avoid an even greater injustice (Rawls, 1971, p.
4).
● Doet een beetje aan Machiavelli’s economie van geweld denken
● Coordination, efficiëntie en stabiliteit zijn aspecten die men aan rechtvaardigheid moet linken. Deze dienen
met elkaar in verband gebracht te worden zodat instanties goed kunnen functioneren. Als een van deze
aspecten ontbreekt, wordt het voor instanties dusdanig problematischer om binnen een samenleving/instantie
rechtvaardigheid te kunnen garanderen, waarbij iedereen van deze samenleving kan profiteren (Rawls, 1971,
p.6).
The subject of Justice
● The primary subject of justice is the basic structure of society, the way in which the major social institutions
distribute fundamental Rights and duties and determine the division of advantages from social cooperation.
● Major institutions: Political Constitution and the principal Economic and social arrangements.
● Taken together as one scheme, the major institutions define men’s Rights and duties and influence
their life prospects, what they can expect to be and how well they can hope to do (Rawls, 1971,p. 7).
● The basic structure is the primary subject of justice because its effects are so profound and present
from the start. The intuitive Notion here is that the structure contains various social positions and that
men Born into different positions have different expectations of life determined, in part, by the
political system as well as by society favor certain starting places over others.
● Een bepaalde klasse binnen de maatschappij kan ook jouw kansen op de arbeidsmarkt en
verdere leven beïnvloeden. Toch zijn deze verschillen binnen de samenleving niet te
voorkomen
● The justice of a social scheme depends essentially on how fundamental Rights and duties are assigned and
on the Economic opportunities and social conditions in the various sectors of society.
● Het is niet zo, dat rechtvaardigheid in het algemeen hier bedoeld is. Zo kan rechtvaardigheid niet in alle
situaties worden toegepast noch van toepassing zijn op prive organisaties.
● I shall be satisfied if it is possible to formulate a reasonable conception of justice for the basic structure of
society conceived for the time being as a closed system isolated from other societies (Rawls, 1971, p. 8).
● A conception of social justice, then, is to be regarded as providing in the first instance a Standard whereby the
distributive aspects of the basic structure of society are to be assessed (Rawls, 1971, p. 9).
● Dit maakt enkel een onderdeel van van een sociaal ideaal uit. Natuurlijk spelen binnen een sociaal
ideaal ook andere factoren een belangrijke rol zoals efficiëntie, liberaal, en vele andere dingen.
● Een sociaal ideaal is vervlochten met met iemand zijn perceptie van de samenleving, een visie die
erop gericht is een sociaal samenwerkingsverband te bewerkstelligen. Verschillende ideeën over de
ideale samenleving heeft ook tot gevolg gehad dat er verschillende ideeën en notities zijn, wat
betreft natuurlijke noodzakelijkheden en kansen binnen een mensenleven. Het is belangrijk om het
verband tussen rechtvaardigheid en het samenwerkingsband, waarvan deze een afgeleide is, te zien
(Rawls, 1971, p. 9-10).
● The concept of justice - a proper balance between competing claims from a conception of justice as a set of
related principles for identifying the relevant considerations which determine this balance (Raw;s, 1971, p. 10).
Het is deel van een sociaal ideaal.
The main idea of the theory of justice
● In order to do this we are not to Think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a
particular form of government. Rather, the guiding idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of
society are the object of the original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons
, concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the
fundamental terms of their association. These principles are to regulate all further agreements; they specify
the kinds of social cooperation that can be entered into and the forms of government that can be established
(Rawls, 1971, p. 11).
● Thus we are to imagine that those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the
principles which are to assign basic Rights and duties and to determine the division of social benefits. Men are
to decide in Advance how they are to regulate their claims against one another and what is to be the
foundation charter of their society. The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of
equal liberty, assuming for the present that this choice Problem has a solution determines the principles of
justice (Rawls, 1971, p. 11-12).
● In justice as fairness the original position of equality corresponds to the state of nature in the traditional theory
of the social contract. The original position is not thought of as an actual historical state of affairs, much less
as a primitive condition of culture. It is understood as a purely hypothetical situation characterized so as to
lead to a certain position.
● Essential features of this situation is that no one knows his place in society in the distribution of
natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength and the like. I shall even assume that the
parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special Psychological propensities. The
principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. This ensures that no one is advantaged or
disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of
social circumstances. Since all are similarly situated and no one is Able to design principles to favor
his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain. For
given the circumstances of the original position, the symmetry of everyone’s relations to each other,
that is, as rational beings with their own ends and capable, I shall assume, of a sense of justice. The
original position is the appropriate initial status quo, and thus the fundamental agreements reached
in it are fair, This explains the propriety of the name justice as fairness: it conveys the idea that the
principles of justice are agreed to in an initial situations that is fair. The name does not mean that the
concepts of justice and fairness are the same (Rawls, 1971, 12-13).
● Justice as fairness begins with one of the most General choices which persons might make together, namely,
with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and
reform of institutions. Then, having chosen a conception of justice we can suppose that they are to choose a
Constitution and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially
agreed upon. Our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we
would have contracted into the General system of rules which defines it (Rawls, 1971, p. 13).
● Assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles (that is, that a particular conception of
justice would be chosen), it Will then be true that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles those
engaged in them say to one another that they are cooperating on terms that they would agree if they were free
and equal persons whose relations with respect to one another were fair (Rawls, 1971, p. 13).
● They would all view their arrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledge in
an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable constraints on the choice of
principles. The General recognition of this fact would provide the basis for a public acceptance of the
corresponding principles of justice (Rawls, 1971, p. 13).
● Natuurlijk is het vrijwel onmogelijk om vrijwillig tot een bepaalde samenleving toe te treden. Ieder
mens wordt binnen een bepaalde klasse van de maatschappij geboren, wat ook weer een stempel
op diens verloop en leven in de maatschappij drukt. Toch een samenleving waarbinnen de principes
van rechtvaardigheid vervuld worden, komt het dichtste tot een samenleving, die op een vrijwillige
basis gebaseerd zou zijn. Dit heeft vooral te maken met het feit dat een dergelijke samenleving
gelijke en eerlijke principes voortbrengt, waarmee mensen op basis van een eerlijk proces mee
zouden instemmen. Dit betekent ook dat leden van een samenleving autonoom zijn en dat diens
verplichtingen het product van hun eigen overeenkomst zijn en daarmee zelfopgelegd zijn (Rawls,
1971, p. 13).
● One feature of justice as fairness is to Think of the parties in the initial situation as rational and mutually
disinterested. This does not mean that the parties are egoists, that is, individuals with only certain kind of
interests, say in wealth, prestige and domination. But they are conceived as not taking an interest in one
another’s interests (Rawls, 1971, p. 13).
● They are to presume that even their spiritual aims May be opposed in the way that the aims o those of
different religions May be opposed (Rawls, 1971, p. 14).
● The concept of rationality should regarded to be taking the most effective means to given ends (Rawls, 1971,
p.14).
, ● It seems that the principle of utility is incompatible with the conception of social cooperation among equals for
Mutual advantage. It appears to be inconsistent with the idea of reciprocity implicit in the Notion of a
well-ordered society (Rawls, 1971, p. 14).
● In the initial situation teh persons would choose two different principles:
● Equality in the assignment of basic Rights and duties
● Social and Economic inequalities, for examples the inequalities of wealth and authority, are just only
if they result in compensating the benefits of everyone, and in particular for the least advantaged
members of society.
● These principles rule out justifying institutions on the grounds that the hardships of Some
are offset by a greater good in the aggregate. It May be expedient but it is not just that
Some should have less in order that Some May prosper. But there is no injustice in the
greater benefits earned by a few provided that the situation of persons not so fortunate is
thereby improved. The intuitive idea is that since everyone’s well-being depends upon a
scheme of cooperation without which no one could have a satisfactory life, the division of
advantages should be such as to draw for the willing cooperation of everyone taking part in
itm including those less well situated. Yet this can be expected only if reasonable terms are
proposed (Rawls, 1971, p. 15).
● Once we decide to look for a conception of justice that nullifies the accidents of natural endowment and the
contingencies of social circumstance as counters in quest for Political and Economic advantage, we are led to
these principles. They express the result of leaving aside those aspects of the social world that seem arbitrary
from a moral point of view (Rawls, 1971, p. 15).
● The outset that justice as fairness,like other contract views, consist of two parts:
1. An interpretation of the initial situation and of the Problem of choice posed there,
2. A set of principles which would be agreed to (Rawls, 1971, p. 15).
● The Merit of the contract terminology is that it conveys the idea that principles of justice May be conceived as
principles that would be chosen by rational persons, and that in this way conceptions of justice May be
explained and justified. The theory of justice is a part of the theory of rational choice. Furthermore, principles
of justice deal with conflicting claims upon the advantages won by social cooperation; they apply to the
relations among several persons and groups, The word contract suggests this plurality as well as the condition
that the appropriate division of advantages must be in accordance with principles acceptable to all parties
(Rawls, 1971, p. 16).
● Justice as fairness is not a complete contract theory. For it is clear that the contractarian idea can be extended
to the choice or more or less an entire ethical system, that is, to a system including principles for all the virtues
and not just only for justice (Rawls, 1971, p. 17).
● Theory fails to embrace all moral relationships
The original position and justification
● The original position is the appropriate initial status quo which ensures that the fundamental agreements
reached in it are fair. This fact Yields the name justice as fairness. It is clear then, that I want to say that one
conception of justice is more reasonable than another, ir justifiable with respect to it, if rational persons in the
initial situation would choose is principles over those of the other for the role of justice. Conceptions of justice
are to be ranked by their acceptability to persons so circumstanced. Understood in this way the question of
justification is settled by working out a Problem of deliberation: we have to ascertain which principles it would
be rational to adopt given the contractual situations. This Connects the theory of justice with the theory of
rational choice (Rawls, 1971, p. 17).
● As the circumstances are represented in different ways, corresponding different principles are accepted. The
concept of the original position is that of the most philosophically favored interpretation of this initial choice for
the purposes of a theory of justice. But how are we to decide what is the most favored interpretation? I
assume, for one thing, that there is a broad Measure of agreement that principles of justice should be chosen
under certain conditions (Rawls, 1971, p. 18).
● The aim of the contract approach is to establish that taken together they impose significant bounds on
acceptable principles of justice. The ideal outcome would be that these conditions determine a Unique set of
principles(Rawls, 1971, p. 18).
● The idea here is simply to make vivid to ourselves the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on
arguments for the principle of justice, and therefore on these principles themselves. Thus it seems reasonable
and generally acceptable that no one should be advantaged or disadvantages by natural Fortune or social
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
√ Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper jacquelinevandervegte. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,48. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 71498 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen