THEORY OF JUSTICE

THE LIFE OF JOHN RAWLS

 John Bordley Rawls was an American political and ethical philosopher

 Born on February 21, 1921 in Baltimore
 Second of five sons of William Lee, who was a prominent lawyer, and
Anna Rawls
 After attending an Episcopalian preparatory school in Connecticut, he
entered Princeton University, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in
1943.
 THE LIFE OF JOHN RAWLS

 As a college student, he wrote an intensely religious senior thesis and

had considered studying for priesthood. Life of John Rawls, his thesis is abt religion - priesthood
(philosophy and theology)

 In 1995, he suffered a stroke which prevented him from continuing

his work.
 He was able to write three more books – The law of peoples, Lectures
on the history of moral philosophy, and Justice and fairness
 He died in 2002 at the age of 81.
 JOHN RAWLS’ ETHICAL PRINCIPLE

 Rawls was considered a major social and political philosopher.

 In his work entitled A Theory of Justice, he upheld the idea that
justice is fairness. The basis of morality is justice
 According to Rawls, the basis of morality is justice.
 He said that justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is
of systems of thought Justice is first virtue, diff institutions must have justice o
pagkakapantay pantay
 JOHN RAWLS’ ETHICAL PRINCIPLE

 He believed that no matter how elegant and practical the ethical

system could be, it still must be rejected if it is untrue and no matter
how efficient and well-arranged the law and institutions could be, said
laws must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust.
If law is unjust or unfair, di makatao, that law must be reformed or
abolished, magkaakroon ng reformation o amendments of the law,
for ex ay di na applicable sa panahon ngayon..
 THE HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION

 In order to elucidate his concept of justice, Rawls talked about a

hypothetical situation. Hypothetical situation - Situations that we imagine, Based on possible ideas rather than actual ones
(To put yourself in one situation and imagine what situations could happen, ano mga pede mangyari)

 In the hypothetical situation, he narrated that man is to imagine

himself that he is placed in the original position of equality. Original position of equality
is veil of ignorance

 In such, situation, man is placed under the veil of ignorance, man is

placed under the veil of ignorance wherein he will not be able to
know most of the socially significant facts about himself.
Moral reasoning device (veil of ignorance) - Dinedeny sayo as decision maker ang pagiging
-10% of population will be slaves, may bias
makakapagbigay benefit sa iyo,meron ding hindi - Produce fair society (veil of ignorance)
 THE HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION

From the hypothetical situation principle, Rawls was able to defend his
two principles of justice:
1. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total
system of equal basic liberties compatible with similar system of
liberty for all. This principle provides a good idea and upholds equal
liberties of all people in a community.
1. Rawls believe that everyone must have the right, equal right to the
basic rights, ex right to vote, for public office, right to freedom of
speech, feasable assembly
 THE HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION

2. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they

are both: a. It refer to the bottom of
the economy ladder, yung
a. To the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with mga mabababa sa society,
mga taong kumikita ng
the just savings principle, and mababa sa society

b. Attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions

of fair equality of opportunity.
b. Rawls realized that society still have inequality of opportunity. Inequality results from (1) inherited, minana,
ex social status.. rawls said that even theres inequality due to inheritance,kelangan pa din gumawa para
mareduce ang inequality- public and private employment should be open to all for fair opportunity, iavoid ang
discrimination
 CATEGORIES OF JUSTICE

 The basis of justice will always be the fair treatment to everybody.

The concept of fair treatment resulted in the different types and
concepts of justice: distributive, procedural, retributive and
restorative.
 1. Distributive justice – kind of justice that is concerned with giving
every individual member of the society an equal distribution of
benefits and resources available.
1. Distributive justice - equal distribution social benefits, even burdens, must share to everyone
- Allocation of resources
 CATEGORIES OF JUSTICE
2. Procedural justice - making and implementing decisions, it is related to the administrative justice and legal proceedings - (due process of law)
Due process of law - tamang proseso ng batas - Every ind has the right of due process and legal proceeding

 Procedural justice – kind of justice that is concerned with making and

implementing decisions that will uphold equality to every individual
member of the society. 2.- Why
Procedural justice -Carrying out of laws anf procedures are neutral
is it important? Once an ind. is placed in judgement, ind. will have trust on the law, That law
is fair and neutral
 Retributive justice – upholds the idea that people deserve to be treated
in the same way they treat others. It consists in the just imposition of
punishment and penalties on those who do wrong.
3. Retributive justice - treated the same way the treat others, mayroong fair agreement and decisions, it justifies punishment as a response to past injustice
or wrongdoings
• Those who committed wrongdoings to others have already committed injustice
• Punishment must be given to uphold justice
- Prone to revenge, Have a tendency on part of the victim to be revengeful or engaged in revengeful act
 CATEGORIES OF JUSTICE
4. Restorative justice - nabuo dahil sa retributive justice, the focus is restoration of the dignity of the victim
- Also restore the offender to be law abinding citizens, to correct the offender - Punishment is correction

 Restorative justice – wherein the focus would not only be on giving

punishment to the individual who committed injustices but more on
the restoration of the dignity of the victims.
 Compensatory justice – kind of justice that concerns the just way in
compensating someone for a past injustice or what he lost when
wronged by others.
5. Compensatory justice - compensate for past injustices
For ex. Malicious mischief, sinira ang gamit, kelangan bayaran ang injustice na ginawa
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

 In categorizing justice, the most important point to consider is that

Rawls held that there has to be equal distribution of opportunities and
disadvantages to everyone in the society. Acc to Rawls, equal distribution of opportunities (social
benefits) and also disadavantage (social burdens)

 Rawls wanted to develop an ethical principle that will uphold an equal

distribution of happiness and sufferings. Principle ay abt sa distributive justice
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

1. Justice as equality: EgalitarianismTreat everyone as equal

Principle that upheld the idea that people should be given equal
treatment. It upheld the principle that people should be treated as equals
, should treat one another as equals, or enjoy an equality of social status
of some sort.
Everyone should be given exactly equal share of a society’s or
group’s benefits and burdens. Equal share of benefit and burden
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

Rawls held that goods should be allocated to people in equal

portions. The more advantaged should be prevented to display their
higher estate especially if it would demean the condition of those who
have less. Equal ang iaallocate sa iba, the more advantaged (mga nakakaangat) should not display if it would
demean (severe loss in dignity) those who have less

The principle definitely uphold equality. However this is quite

difficult because it is impossible to have equality in all human beings
because everyone is different in terms of abilities, intelligence, virtues,
needs, desires and other physical and mental characteristics.
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

It is noted that there are two kinds of equality: a. everyone has the right, everyone has
the right to hold public office

a. Political equality – equal participation in and treatment by the means of

controlling and directing the political system
b. Economic equality – equality of income, wealth, and opportunity. Rawls
believed that criticism is applicable only to economic equality and not to
political equality. But still, economic equality is defensible because
every person has a right to a minimum standard of living that may vary
from one society to another. This can be a basis of equality in a society.
b. right to a minimum standard of living
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

2. Justice-based on contribution: the capitalist justice

It is based on the premise that benefits should be distributed
according to the degree of contribution that each person provides for
the benefit of the society as a whole. In a capitalist society, the
privileges that everyone receives are commensurate with the type of
contribution one gives to the community. sinusukat
benefits
ang contribution, paglaki ng contribution paglaki ng
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

How can the value of the contribution of everyone be measured?

The capitalist theorists would claim that one’s contribution can be
measured by the amount of work that one would be rendered. The
greater and harder one works, the greater are the share of benefits.
Based on the premise that hard work should lead to success, the
capitalist theorists would claim that if one would be working hard, then
success would be imminent. the greater the share of contribution, the more benefits will
come to you
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

3. Justice-based on needs and abilities: Socialismdapat nakadepende sa pangangailangan ng mga tao

According to the principles of socialism, work burdens must be
distributed according to the ability of the people. At the same time,
benefits must also be distributed according to their needs.
Peoples have different abilities. Those who are gifted with greater
abilities must also given more responsibilities because greater
responsibilities cannot just be given to people who have lesser abilities.
ppl with greater abilities ay bibigyan ng mas maraming responsibilities at hindi pede ibigay ang
responsibility sa mas taong may lesser ability kasi pede magresult sa failure
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

People are capable of realizing their potential by exercising their

abilities in productive work. Those who have greater potential will be
considered of value. In this sense work must be distributed based on the
ability of the individual so that work can be made more beneficial to
people and the benefits of work well distributed in order to promote
human happiness and well-being. Distributing the work to people who
have great potential will be of great help to meet the basic needs of the
people as a whole in community.
pag may potential ka, mas mahalaga ka, the benefits will be given based on the needs of an individual
 THEORIES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

4. Justice as freedom: Libertarianism 4. kung alin lang ang legal, yun lang ang may freedom kang gawin
In democratic systems of government, citizens are given the right to
act as they please, in a political liberty, the people do not have
unlimited freedom. In societies directed by laws, liberty can consist
only in the power of doing what we ought to desire, and in not being
constrained to do what we ought not to desire. Liberty is considered as
a right of doing whatever the laws permit
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

1. Every individual is inviolable

Rawls held that the maximum total good may not be pursued by any
means if it will become unfair and disadvantageous to the minorities
and the unskilled.
Rawls held that the principle of inviolability of every individual is
so sacred that not even the general welfare of the society nor the
happiness of the greatest number can override and supersede it.
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

2. An erroneous theory is tolerable in the absence of a good one.

In a situation where there are two erroneous laws, Rawls held that
the people should choose which of the two would be considered better
and the less erroneous. An act of injustice, according to Rawls, can be
tolerated if and only if it is necessary to avoid an even greater act of
injustice.
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

3. Individual liberties should be restricted in order to maintain equality

of opportunity
Liberties of equal citizenship are of paramount importance in a just
society. Individual rights are not subject to political bargaining or
compromise because this will be unfair. Instead, the rights of every
individual should always be respected and each should be given an
opportunity to uphold one’s own dignity.
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

Aware of the need for principles that bind and guide individuals in
making moral decisions, Rawls cited four types of duties
1. Fairness in our dealings with others. This is the basic principle of
justice in the ethics of Rawls
2. Fidelity. Being faithful to one’s promises, vows, and responsibilities
are giving justice to the person to whom the promises are to be
given.
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

3. Respect for others. This is a sense of justice put into concrete action.
4. Beneficence. Doing good deeds to others and thinking only of the
welfare of the others.
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

Rawls mentioned, that everybody should follow what he considered as

the four natural duties. These are:
1. The duty of justice
2. The duty of helping others in need or in jeopardy.
3. The duty not to harm or injure others
4. The duty to keep our promises.
 RAWLS THEORY OF JUDTICE

The above-mentioned duties suggest that Rawls was only trying to

endorse the concept of the prima facie duties of Ross. Moreover he also
perceived the need to resolved cases of conflicting duties.
 CRITIQUE ON THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLE OF RAWLS

 Rawls did not permit the people in original position to know their
goals, plans, interests, and purposes but only their self-respect, wealth
and rationality, this view would seem to contradict his notion of
justice as fairness. A person who looks up to his wealth and rationality
would have a tendency to look down at others who are not gifted
with wealth and intelligence.
 CRITIQUE ON THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLE OF RAWLS

 Since the people in the original position are rational beings, it will be
somewhat unthinkable that this person will never be able to know their
sex, race, social position, or natural endowments. If they are under the
veil of ignorance, these people will find their way to get rid of this veil
and know their position and purpose in life. This is because a rational
being will always be restless until he finds the meaning and purpose of
life. If people will never know their sex, race, social position, or
natural endowments, they will never be able to know also their
responsibilities that are attached to their social position.
 CRITIQUE ON THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLE OF RAWLS

 His concept of justice, “Liberties of individual should be restricted

provided that such restrictions are for the benefit of everyone”, can be
considered referring to the principle of the greatest number, which is
contradictory to his view that every individual is inviolable.