The Case for Equality/ John Rawls

The Case for Equality/ John Rawls

Rawls introduces this concept by establishing a social contract between people behind a "veil of ignorance". When a society is formed and no one knows anything about each other's position or background such as ethnic group, race, or gender, then all are ignorant. Then we talk about "the veil of ignorance." If people do not have a clue about what is going on around them and among them, then they are ignorant. They have no knowledge, no information on each other; therefore, they would have to agree on rules which are fair and just without biases special interests. The general concept of Rawls position is that all social primary good should be distributed equally to individuals in a society, unless an unequal distribution favors those less fortunate. Rawls' principles were designed to guards against injustices, which was inflicted upon society.

John Rawls states two principles of justice which he says are provisional. The first of these states that each person is to have an equal right to the most basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. The second states that social and economic inequality are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to the advantage of everyone and attached to positions and offices open to all. Rawls says that these principles refer to the basic structure of society and that they are to govern the rights and duties and to regulate the distribution of social and economic advantages.

Rawls argues that society should be structured in such a way that would allow similarly able people to have similar life chances; the purpose of this ethics class from day one is to figure out and discuss what's right and wrong to determine what might be an unethical action: killing one to save two people on a boat is wrong. Others have the greatest verse the least, in that you are allowed to make laws if they benefit the greatest. Yet other views say that society should let all people in society be equal, so yes I can say that after reading the case for equality does stimulate me; because I believe to have a greater amount of freedom, you must have less fairness and equality. To have a greater amount of fairness, you must have less freedom and equality. To have a greater amount of equality, you must have less freedom and fairness. Take, for example, economic equality. If it is going to be possible