scholarly journals A REVIEW ON RAWLS THEORY OF JUSTICE

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-36
Author(s):  
M.Yasir Said ◽  
Yati Nurhayati
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Case Review ◽  
Core Concept ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
The Core ◽  
Theories Of Justice

Justice is an abstract idea and understanding the core concept of various types of justice will help scholars, lawyers and law enforcement to develop and use the theory for legislative drafting, judicial review, case review, in court defense, and legal research and writing. In this paper we discussed the essence of Rawls Justice, the implication and compared it to other theories of justice. Therefore this paper will focused on examining and reviewing John Rawls idea of Justice and how to implement it in society. The method used in this study is doctrinal legal research. The result of this study while we discussed that the three Rawls principles cannot be realized together because one principle collides with another. Rawls prioritizes that the principle of the equal liberty which is lexically maximized precedes the second and third principles. However we believe Justice as Fairness in action should not mean that there is equality but rather emphasizes the concept of balance for the law in providing justice.

scholarly journals TRANSFORMASI KESETARAAN BURUH: STUDI KRITIS TEORI KEADILAN JOHN RAWLS

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Mohammad Takdir
Keyword(s):  
Social Structure ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Labor Rights ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Theories Of Justice

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.

scholarly journals Diskursus Mengenai Keadilan Sosial: Kajian Teori Keadilan dalam Liberalisme Locke, Persamaan Marx, dan 'Justice as Fairness' Rawls

MELINTAS ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 309
Author(s):  
Alfensius Alwino
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Abstract Theory ◽  
Veil Of Ignorance ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Theories Of Justice ◽  
Political Studies ◽  
History Of ◽  
Principles Of Justice

Through the history of philosophy, the theme of justice has become a very important topic. Thinkers of the theories such as utilitarianism, intuitionism, eudaimonism, perfectionism, liberalism, communitarianism, and socialism have discussed the theme. As French philosopher Alain Badiou has pointed out, the central of political studies from the time of Plato to the present day is justice. The question is what is justice? For John Rawls, justice is the supreme virtue of human. In <em>A Theory of Justice</em>, Rawls asserts that justice is the first priority in social institutions, as is truth in the system of thought. A theory, however elegant and economical, must be rejected or revised if it is not true, so the laws and institutions, however efficient and neat, must be reformed or removed if it is unfair. Rawls criticizes the theory of justice in Lockean liberalism and Marxian socialism. Both theories of justice are very strong colouring the landscape of debate on the roots of thinking about justice. For Rawls, liberalism that accentuates basic freedoms can create inequality between people who have better abilities with less fortunate people. Similarly, socialism which accentuates equality ignores basic freedoms. The two theories of justice are considered ideological in the sense that there are hidden interests behind the jargons of freedom and equality. Rawls then develops an abstract theory of justice, in which the participants depart from a veil of ignorance, so that they are free of any interest and ambition. Here they might build a cooperative contract in a society governed by the principles of justice.

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
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
Economic Efficiency ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Social Stability ◽  
Social Equality ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Economic Philosophy ◽  
The Relationship

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

Justice as Fairness: For Groups?

1975 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 607-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vernon Van Dyke
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Homogeneous State ◽  
Dominant Form ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
The Social ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Almost All

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.

scholarly journals A Defense of Nonideal Theories of Justice / Uma Defesa de Teorias de Justiça Não Ideais

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Goya Tocchetto
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Moral Systems ◽  
The Core ◽  
Current Prevalence ◽  
Theories Of Justice ◽  
Recent Debate ◽  
Inalienable Rights

Abstract: The overwhelming majority of contemporary theories of justice is grounded in the rationalist tradition (Frazer, 2010). As a consequence, political philosophers such as John Rawls (1971) have interpreted moral systems as axiomatic, substantially based on concepts of inalienable rights and duties—usually guided by the core value attached to human dignity. Once ethicists started working under an axiomatic framework, empirical evidence has become less and less useful. This road has been conducive to the current prevalence of ideal theories in the field. On a dissonant note, recent debate in political philosophy has rekindled our attention to the development of nonideal theories of justice. Yet before one argues in favor of nonideal (or comparative) theories of justice, one has to be certain that all arguments against the broader incorporation of empirical evidence in the development of political philosophical theories are not valid. Therefore the focus of the present paper is the assessment—and dismissal—of these arguments.Keywords: Theories of Justice; Nonideal Theories; Empirical Evidence; MethodologyResumo: A grande maioria das teorias de justiça contemporâneas se baseiam na tradição racionalista (Frazer, 2010). Como consequência, filósofos políticos como John Rawls (1971) têm interpretado sistemas morais como axiomáticos, baseados substancialmente em conceitos de direitos e deveres inalienáveis – geralmente guiados pelo valor central concedido à dignidade humana. Uma vez que os eticistas começaram a utilizar uma moldura axiomática, as evidências empíricas se tornaram cada vez menos úteis. Esse caminho foi relevante para a atual prevalência de teorias ideais nesse campo. De maneira dissonante, o debate recente na filosofia política reacendeu a atenção para o desenvolvimento de teorias de justiça não ideais. Contudo, antes que alguém argumente em favor de teorias de justiça não ideais (ou comparativas), é preciso estar certo de que todos os argumentos contrários a uma incorporação mais ampla de evidências empíricas no desenvolvimento de teorias políticas filosóficas não são válidos. Portanto, o foco deste artigo é a avaliação – e rejeição – destes argumentos.Palavras-chave: Teorias de justiça; Teorias não ideais; Evidência empírica; Metodologia.

Philosophers-Citizens

In Our Name ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Beerbohm
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Life Of The Mind ◽  
The Mind ◽  
The Ideal

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.

O Liberalismo em John Rawls e a Resposta aos Comunitaristas

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (30) ◽  
pp. 61-82
Author(s):  
Denis Coitinho Silveira ◽  
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Political Liberalism ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice

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.

scholarly journals Posição original e equilíbrio reflexivo em John Rawls: o problema da justificação

2009 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-157
Author(s):  
Denis Coitinho Silveira
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Political Liberalism ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice

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.

Inequalities Affecting Access to Healthcare: A Philosophical Reflection

2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-15
Author(s):  
Cristi Campbell Coursen,
Keyword(s):  
Health Equity ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
Moral Concern ◽  
Moral Imperative ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Overwhelming Evidence

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

Morality, Rational Choice, and Semantic Representation

1988 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gauthier
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Semantic Representation ◽  
New Venture ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Historical Antecedents

(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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document