The State’s Role in Ensuring Fair Income Distribution in Vietnam Today: Some Issues from the Theory of Justice as Fairness by John Rawls

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-195

Fairness in income distribution is a factor that both motivates employees and contributes to maintaining social stability. In Vietnam, fair income distribution has been studied from various perspectives. In this article, through the analysis and synthesis of related documents and evidence, and from the perspective of economic philosophy, the author applies John Rawls’s Theory of Justice as Fairness to analyze some issues arising from the implementation of the state’s role in ensuring fair income distribution from 1986 to present. These are unifying the perception of fairness in income distribution; solving the relationship between economic efficiency and social equality; ensuring benefits for the least-privileged people in society; and controlling income. On that basis, the author makes some recommendations to enhance the state’s role in ensuring fair income distribution in Vietnam. Received 11thNovember 2019; Revised 10thApril 2020; Accepted 20th April 2020

1975 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 607-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vernon Van Dyke

In A Theory of Justice, John Rawls assumes that the principles of justice are for individuals in a society, and in general he assumes that the society is an ethnically homogeneous state. He thus follows the tradition associated with the dominant form of the social contract theory, which focuses on the individual and the state. His assumptions neglect the fact that almost all states are ethnically plural or heterogeneous, and that many of them confer special status and rights on ethnic groups as collective entities; for example, many of them confer special status and rights on indigenous groups, on groups disadvantaged by prior discrimination, and on minorities and other groups conceded a right to survive as distinct cultural entities. Status and rights for groups necessarily mean differentiation among individuals depending on their membership; and this in turn means that a theory of justice that focuses on the individual and neglects the group both fails to account for existing practices and fails to give guidance where the practices are at issue.


Author(s):  
Eric Beerbohm

This chapter challenges an account of citizenship that treats us as political philosophers or perennial deliberators and instead proposes the model of the philosopher-citizen who exhibits a computationally intense life of the mind. It first describes the ideal of the philosopher-citizen before considering how a theory of justice is to be employed by well-intentioned citizens by taking into account the views of John Rawls. It argues that the model of the philosopher-citizens tends to be monistic, collapsing the diversity of moral achievements that citizens can make in a democracy, and that this ideal should be separated from an account of the citizen's decision-making obligations. The chapter also examines the principles for citizens and for representatives in the context of Justice as Fairness and concludes by outlining the essential assumptions of a nonideal democratic theory.


Author(s):  
Denis Coitinho Silveira ◽  

The aim of this article is to characterize the John Rawls’s theory of justice as fairness developed in A Theory of Justice (1971), Political Liberalism (1993), Replay to Habermas (1995) and Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (2001), with a view to identifying the convergent points between deontological conception with teleological characteristics and identify a substantive conception of justice, not purely procedural, which is universalist albeit not transcendental, making possible an approach between communitarian and liberal ethical theories.


2009 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-157
Author(s):  
Denis Coitinho Silveira

O objetivo deste artigo é estabelecer algumas considerações sobre o papel dos procedimentos de posição original e equilíbrio reflexivo na teoria da justiça como equidade de John Rawls, nas obras A Theory of Justice, Political Liberalism e Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Eu pretendo mostrar que Rawls faz uso de um modelo coerentista-pragmático de justificação dos princípios de justiça em um âmbito público, que é não-fundacionalista em razão da interconexão entre estes procedimentos.


2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-15
Author(s):  
Cristi Campbell Coursen,

There is overwhelming evidence that social inequalities affect health outcomes. Health deprivation as a consequence of poverty is a moral concern. Inequitable access to healthcare may be considered a subject of social justice inquiry. Concepts within John Rawls’ (2001) theory of justice as fairness are used as a philosophical template to identify inequalities in healthcare delivery within the complexity of the Medicaid system. From a caring perspective, Medicaid can be fair if the individuals responsible for its policies and their implementation believe that health equity is a moral imperative and they act with intent to provide health equity


1988 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gauthier

(1) In his recent paper, “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical,” John Rawls makes use of a footnote to disown what to many readers must have seemed one of the most striking and original underlying ideas of his theory of justice, that it “is a part, perhaps the most significant part, of the theory of rational choice.” That Rawls should issue this disclaimer indicates, at least in my view, that he has a much clearer understanding of his theory, and its relationship to rational choice than he did at the time that he wrote A Theory of Justice. As I note in Morals by Agreement (pp.4–5), Rawls does not show that principles of justice are principles of rational choice. Hence, in appropriating the idea, I can claim diat I am undertaking a pioneering enterprise. No doubt Thomas Hobbes would have undertaken it had the resources of the theory of rational choice been at his disposal, but I do not intend to pursue counterfactuals in a search for historical antecedents. Moral theory as rational choice theory is, I claim, a new venture.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. 84-99
Author(s):  
Viturino Ribeiro da Silva

A cooperação equitativa é um conceito central da filosofia de John Rawls e possui uma estreita relação com as noções de racionalidade, razoabilidade e tolerância. Portanto, faz-se necessário ressaltar que tais temas são fundamentais para uma adequada compreensão da teoria rawlsiana de justiça. Rawls elege a justiça como virtude primária e princípio norteador na construção da sua teoria. Em virtude disso, a preocupação de Rawls é a resolução das desigualdades sociais que ocorrem nos sistemas políticos democráticos. A noção de justiça como equidade faz-se indispensável frente à necessidade de eleger a liberdade enquanto preocupação com o justo equilíbrio e ao “consenso nas sociedades plurais”. É a partir da concepção de cooperação equitativa que Rawls tenta resolver o impasse contemporâneo da convivência de diferentes doutrinas abrangentes razoáveis sejam elas, religiosas, filosóficas ou morais. Dessa forma, a teoria rawlsiana de justiça tem como proposta a “coexistência pacifica” ante essa pluralidade de doutrinas compreensivas. Assim posto, a justiça como equidade, pode plausivelmente, ser a forma mais viável de coexistência pacífica que agrupamentos sociais poderiam seguir ou se pautar. Sob essa ótica, acredita-se que a noção de cooperação equitativa rawlsiana será uma via de justiça que enfatiza os direitos individuais sem desmerecer aquilo que é próprio do coletivo. Abstract: Fair cooperation is a central concept of J. Rawls´s philosophy and keeps a close relationship with the the notions of rationality, reasonability, and tolerance. Thus it is important to claim that these notions are necessary for a correct comprehension of rawlsian theory of justice. Rawls claims justice as the primary virtue and main principle of his theory. The aim of Rawls is to solve the social inequalities that occur in democratic political systems. The concept of justice as fairness is essential before the need of electing the liberty as concerning to the just balance and to the “consensus in the plural societies”. By starting from the conception of fair cooperation Rawls tries to solve the contemporary problem of different comprehensive doctrines sharing the same political and social space, no matter they are religious, philosophical or moral ones. The rawlsian theory of justice claims to propose as “pacific cohabitation” among that plurality of comprehensive doctrines. In this way, justice as fairness may plausibility be the most viable form of pacific cohabitation that social groups can follow or be ruled. Under this perspective, we believe that the rawlsian concept of fair cooperation will be a way of justice that focus on individual rights without deprive the significance of collective. Keywords: Rawls, fair cooperation, original position, rationality, reasonability. 


2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Scanlon

This paper discusses the relationship between moral philosophy and political philosophy. It holds that political philosophy in some way is part of moral philosophy as the former deals with the content of moral standards governing the relations between individuals and institutions. That would be the purpose of the ?morality of institutions?, while the so-called "individual morality" would inform the standards applicable to individuals. On the basis of a conception of individual morality as it relates to contractualism and a discussion of the morality of institutions that closely follows John Rawls? theory of justice, the paper addresses the question of the foundations of the obligation to comply with institution-defined standards that are directed towards individuals. At the end, it focuses in particular on the difficulty of rationalizing that obligation in the case of unjust institutions.


2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (SI) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhonda R. Dobbs

This paper utilizes John Rawls’ theory of Justice as Fairness to assess laws banning same-sex marriage. It is argued that such laws are unjust from this perspective in that they do serve to disadvantage homosexuals in regards to the legal benefits of marriage. In addition, legal unions (i.e. domestic partnerships or civil unions) that stop short of marriage do not compensate for this unjustness in that they do not offer the same legal benefits of marriage.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Mohammad Takdir

This paper aims to change the laborers who are always seen as an underdeveloped and oppressed societies. In looking at the relations of laborers and employers, some people often use the paradigm of slavery rather than the humanitarian paradigm.This research used theory of justice John Rawls’s as an approach in fighting for labor rights in the works system in Indonesia. Justice for Rawlsm defined as a combination of freedom and equality. Rawlsian’s theory of justice often refereed to as “liberal equality”, which emphasizes the justice as fairness aspect. This theory of justice used to offer a new alternative in correcting earlier theories of justice, such as utilitarianism and institutionalism that are perceived as failing in reducing errors to the paradigm of labor. This study showed that injustice in a social structure of society is more due to the loss of deep empathy associated with the argument of equality as a keyword in the conception of justice. Rawls offers the concept of justice as fairness that should be the main foothold in the struggle for equality of laborers in various aspects, especially concerning the fulfillment of rights, obligations, and welfare of life.Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengubah paradigma tentang buruh yang selalu dipandang sebagai sekelompok masyarakat yang terbelakang dan tertindas. Dalam memandang relasi buruh dan majikan, sebagian orang seringkali menggunakan paradigma perbudakan daripada paradigma kemanusiaan (humanitarian paradigm). Penelitian ini menggunakan teori keadilan John Rawls sebagai pendekatan dalam memperjuangkan hak-hak buruh dalam sistem kerja di Indonesia. Keadilan bagi Rawls, diartikan sebagai perpaduan antara kebebasan (freedom) dan kesamaan (fairness). Teori keadilan Rawlsian sering disebut dengan istilah “kesamaan-liberal”, yang menekankan pada aspek justice as fairness.Teori keadilan ini digunakan untuk menawarkan sebuah alternatif baru dalam mengoreksi teori-teori keadilan sebelumnya, seperti utilitarianisme dan institusionalisme yang dianggap gagal dalam mengurangi kesalahan terhadap paradigma buruh. Hasil Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ketidakadilan dalam sebuah struktur sosial masyarakat lebih diakibatkan oleh hilangnya rasa empati yang mendalam terkait dengan argumen kesetaraan (equality) sebagai kata kunci dalam konsepsi keadilan. Rawls menawarkan konsep tentang justice as fairness yang harus menjadi pijakan utama dalam memperjuangkan kesetaraan buruh dalam berbagai aspek, terutama menyangkut pemenuhan hak, kewajiban dan kesejahteraan hidup.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document