scholarly journals The Influence of Christianity on the Philosophy of John Rawls

Diacovensia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-319
Author(s):  
Marko Jakić

This article is about a contrastive analysis of Rawls’s views in mutually different periods of his philosophical development in relation to possible influences of Christian thought on his overall philosophy. The evidence of such Christian influence on his philosophy is conducted through his examination of sociability and morality as an essential ontological feature of a human being. The second principle of justice is especially emphasized as a view that has a source in Christian thought.

Author(s):  
Robert A. Schultz

As we saw from the last two chapters, the ethical IT professional is embedded in contexts of management, organization, and society. Ethical behavior for the IT professional is, therefore, impacted by the ethics of people and institutions in his or her environment. The primary term for ethical institutions is justice.1 In the next three chapters, we will examine the justice of institutions impacting the IT professional. The framework used will be that provided by the works of John Rawls (1999, 2001). Rawls’ work is based on the idea of a social contract, that a justly ordered society is one to which individuals can freely decide to obligate themselves. But our decision will very likely be biased if we base it on our current situation. So Rawls’ major addition is to say that the decision must be made prior to being in society, without knowledge of what our position will be in society, and it will be a decision we will be obligated to stick to and expect others to make and stick to as well. The basic principles for society chosen in this position (which Rawls calls the original position) will be the Principles of Justice. According to Rawls (1999, 2001), there will be two: 1. The First Principle of Justice or Greatest Equal Liberty: Society is to be arranged so that all members have the greatest equal liberty possible for all, including fair equality of opportunity. Each individual has basic liberties which are not to be compromised or traded off for other benefits. Besides the basic freedoms such as freedom of speech, assembly, religion, and so on, it includes equality of opportunity. Thus society’s rules are not biased against anyone in it and allow all to pursue their interests and realize their abilities. 2. The Second Principle of Justice or the Difference Principle: Economic inequalities in society are justified insofar as they make members of the least advantaged social class, better off than if there were no inequality. The social contract basis for this principle is straightforward: If you are entering a society with no knowledge of your specific place in that society, the Difference Principle guarantees that you will be no worse off than you need to be to keep the society functioning.


2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANDREW MASON

Political theorists disagree about the extent to which issues of feasibility, stability, institutional design and human nature can be bracketed in analysing the concept of justice. At one end of the spectrum some argue that no analysis of justice can be adequate in the absence of an account of how it could be implemented, whereas at the other end there are those who argue that principles of justice are logically independent of issues of feasibility. Influenced by the work of John Rawls, many theorists occupy the middle ground, maintaining that analyses of justice must be realistic, that is, realizable under the best of foreseeable conditions. Against Rawls and others, this article argues that feasibility does not constrain what can count as an adequate principle of justice but nevertheless maintains that there are limits on such principles that derive in part from human nature, which divergent theories of justice must respect. It also distinguishes between different levels of analysis, some of which are governed by feasibility constraints.


2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 193-213
Author(s):  
Neera K. Badhwar

Abstract:Contra John Rawls, G. A. Cohen argues that the fundamental principles of justice are not constrained by the limits of our nature or the nature of society, even at its historical best. Justice is what it is, even if it will never be realized, fully or at all. Likewise, David Estlund argues that since our innate motivations can be justice-tainting, they cannot be a constraint on the right conception of justice. Cohen and Estlund agree that if the attempt to implement a certain conception of justice is likely to result in widespread harm or injustice, then it should not be implemented, but that this does not entail that the conception itself is false. I argue that (i) there is no way to judge the soundness of a principle of justice independently of all psychological facts, and the effects that the principle is likely to have if it is implemented; (ii) a principle of justice that, if implemented, makes it hard or impossible for individuals committed to justice to lead happy and worthwhile lives, even if the circumstances are favorable to living justly, cannot be sound; (iii) without the constraints noted in (i) and (ii), there can be no reason to reject racist, sexist, or other wrongheaded principles of justice that have been advanced as sound over the years, principles that even Cohen and Estlund would reject. In short, justice is justice only if kept within the limits of human nature.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. p65
Author(s):  
Gemma Cliff Nguia Oniangué

Social discrimination in general and sexual one in particular bears several negative social impacts whose manifestations are even observable in human being behaviours through speech acts and proverbs in particular emphasizing on sexist aspect. Knowing that African customs are the basis or the foundation of the African people’s life, women are not given the same consideration as in Western countries. Accordingly, a look on the sexist proverb both in English and Kibeembe will help to see the actual place of women provided by these two respective communities. Finally, the data has shown in some respect that there are some similarities between English and Kibeembe sexist proverbs


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 01
Author(s):  
Manar Ahmed Elhalwany

En este trabajo se expone un análisis contrastivo a nivel pragma-lingüístico del lenguaje narrativo en dos novelas: Charla sobre el Nilo del escritor Nobel egipcio Naguib Mahfuz y Conversación de la Catedral del novelista peruano Mario Vargas Llosa. El análisis se centra en el acuerdo intuitivo notable entre estos dos autores Nobel, a pesar de la distancia cultural, lingüística y geográfica, en desviar el Principio de Cortesía de Geoffery Leech. En ambas novelas se ve claro el uso de fórmulas lingüísticas que rompen la Cortesía pragmática con el fin de lograr una profunda y concienzuda crítica social de la realidad egipcia y peruana en la época de los años cincuenta y sesenta. A través de la violación del principio pragmático, ambos autores ganadores del Nobel, objeto de este estudio, buscan exponer una dolencia mayor que afecta a la sociedad tanto egipcia como peruana, una descortesía hacia los ciudadanos que pertenecen a diversos sectores y clases sociales. En las dos novelas analizadas, los novelistas encontraron en la transgresión del Principio de Cortesía el mejor camino para presentar las inquietudes y los conflictos constantes del ser humano contra su propia sociedad. Así mismo, tanto Mahfuz como Llosa, exponen las mentalidades que sustentan la estratificación de la sociedad, con sus respectivos prejuicios, creencias e ideologías. PALABRAS CLAVE: pragmática, cortesía, literatura del Nobel, Naguib Mahfuz, Vargas Llosa. The social implications of (im)politeness in narrative language of the Nobel authors ABSTRACTIn this paper, a contrastive analysis is presented at a pragmatic linguistic level of narrative language in two novels: Talking on the Nile of the Egyptian Nobel writer Naguib Mahfuz and Conversation of the Cathedral of the Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas Llosa. The analysis focuses on the remarkable intuitive agreement between these two Nobel authors in deviating from the Geoffery Leech Politeness Principle. In both novels it is clear the use of linguistic formulas that violates the pragmatic politeness in order to achieve a deep and thorough social criticism of the Egyptian and Peruvian reality in the time of the fifties and sixties. Through the violation of the pragmatic principle, both Nobel authors, the objective of this study, seek to expose a greater ailment that affects both Egyptian and Peruvian society, an impoliteness towards citizens belonging to various sectors and social classes. In the two novels analyzed, the novelists found in the transgression of the Principle of Courtesy the best way to present the concerns and constant conflicts of the human being against his own society. Likewise, both Mahfuz and Llosa, expose the mentalities that support the stratification of society, with their respective prejudices, beliefs and ideologies. KEYWORDS: Pragmatics, politeness, Nobel`s authors, Naguib Mahfuz, Mario Vargas Llosa.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-136
Author(s):  
Iqbal Hasanuddin

Charles Taylor is a Canadian Philosopher who is very critical to the idea of distributive justice from the liberal thinkers. One of them is John Rawls, especially his thought in A Theory of Justice. Then, this paper will examine Taylor’s view on that idea. To do so, I analyze Taylor’s Philosophy and the Human Sciences. Following Aristotelian way of thinking on the importance of society to achieve the human good, Taylor criticizes some basic assumptions which support the liberal idea of justice. For him, the emergence of the idea of distributive justice is caused by the failure of the modern thinkers to understand the essence of human being and its relation to society.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 97
Author(s):  
Wadyo Pandapotan Pasaribu

ABSTRACT: This article with a title "ThePolicy of People Business Credit (PBC ID: KUR) in the view of John Rawls Theory of Justice" will firstly explain the economic condition of our country (the Republic of Indonesia) from the analysis of experts in economy and governments view to the current economic situation. Next, the discussion is about the formula of the policy of people business credit as an economic policy of Indonesian government in her effort to reduce the number of economic gap or income gap with a business fund allocation to SMEthrough PBC program. Then, this article explains John Rawls general principle of justice which is related to pareto optimalitywhereas on its practical level it is distributive justice that takes effect, in which each actor will get in accordance with his contribution in the market. KEYWORDS:people business credit, distributive justice, John Rawls


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abraham Van de Beek

Early Christianity is not only a source of historical interest, it also challenges the systematic theology and Christian ethics of today. Early Christians saw themselves as a community of life with the Eucharist at its centre. Because they participated in eternal life, they were willing to sacrifice their earthly lives in times of persecution and in the care for those who were in mortal danger. As a community of life, they rejected killing any human being, and thus also rejected abortion and military service. They were not an alternative community marked by their diet, dress or emancipation. In such issues they adapted to their environment. They made a difference by their love for those who were in need and by their faithfulness to Christ – though their message was sometimes better than their praxis.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
B Hallen

Theories regarding the nature and achievement of personhood in a communitarian context appear to differ in significant respects in the writings of several contemporary African philosophers. Ifeanyi Menkiti seems to regard ethnic differences as sufficient to warrant a national accommodation of multiculturalism with respect to moralities and attendant beliefs. Kwasi Wiredu argues that there is a substantive universal moral principle that undercuts such apparent and relatively superficial diversity. Communitarianism also seems to provide a better framework for explaining how a human being becomes a person than classical liberal theory as enunciated by someone like John Rawls. KeywordsCommunitarianism, liberalism, multiculturalism, personhood, Masolo, Menkiti, Rawls, Wiredu


2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
pp. s114-s114
Author(s):  
Y. Haraguchi

There are many problems, to be solved in the actual fields of disaster medicine. That is the reason why we completed the disaster medicine compendium, 2005. As the next stage, we focused upon the significance of the philosophy from the viewpoint of the disaster medicine.ResultsIn the disaster situation, leaders are obliged to determine the policies under the mental/ sophisticated consideration. Basically, the following famous phrase “the greatest good (happiness) for the greatest number of people” are accepted simply/childishly without profound thought. This phrase is presented by the popular concept of Utilitarianism beggined by Jeremy Bentham, followed by John Stuart Mill, etc. This concept strongly influenced in the field of disaster medicine, especially the decision making of triage. However, several argument or criticisms have been pointed out: i.e., definition of happiness, relief of the minority or so-called CWAP, etc. Other opinions are included, as follows: John Rawls: The Principle of Justice or Maximin Principle, Kan Naoto: Minimal unhappiness/misery in the society/people, etc.ConclusionsI basically appreciate the concept utilitarianism. But, especially, if we consider the CWAP or people in the poor countries under the actual unfavorable condition, the latter concepts should also be included.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document