THEORIES

OF JUSTICE:
RAWLS and HABERMAS
Concept of Justice

HABERMAS
 Rawls was dissatisfied with the traditional philosophical arguments about w
hat makes a social institution just and about what justifies political or social
John Rawls actions and policies

Society should
pursue the Tyranny of
Utilitarian greatest good the majorities
Argument for the over the
greatest minorities
number

humans intuit
Intuitionist what is right “people know
and wrong by it when they
Argument some innate see it”
moral sense
IDEA OF JUSTICE AS FAIRNESS

The basic structure

Justice as the first
of society as the
virtue of social
primary subject of
institutions
justice;
The main idea of a theory of justice asks,

What kind of organization of society would rational

persons choose if they were in an initial position of
independence and equality and were setting up a
system of cooperation?
ORIGINAL POSITION and VEIL OF IGNORANCE
 The original position is a hypothetical situation developed as a thought experiment
that will aid in determining the basic structure of society they will live in.

Free and equal

(no hierarchy)

When participants would be

deprived of information about the
Veil of Ignorance
position and particular
Negotiate on their
characteristics he/she will be in
own best interest
A visual depiction of philosopher John Rawls' hypothetical veil of ignorance. Citizens making choices
about their society are asked to make them from an "original position" of equality (left) behind a "veil
of ignorance" (wall, center), without knowing what gender, race, abilities, tastes, wealth, or position in
society they will have (right). Rawls claims this will cause them to choose "fair" policies.
(1) Principle of Equal Liberty
 Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal
basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others.

• Importance of • right to suffrage and to • These kinds of

run for a public office or
equality of right position, freedom from liberty cannot
to basic liberty arbitrary arrest, right to be
among all assembly, freedom of compromised
speech, to be arrested in
persons lawful manner inter alia. over other social
goods.
 (2) Principle of Difference
 Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a)
reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and (b) attached to positions

and offices open to all.

Economic Inequality may be permitted if it benefits to the least
privileged in a society

It allows unavoidable inequalities in terms of distributing wealth

and income as long as it brings advantages to everyone.

Ex. Gradation Method of Taxation in the Philippines

Going back to the question…

What kind of organization of society would rational persons choose if they were in an initial
position of independence and equality and were setting up a system of cooperation?

Stated differently,
 If no one could know what place he or she would occupy in the society being formed, what
arrangement of the society would a rational person choose?

 The choice would be for a social structure that would best

benefit
the unknowing chooser if she or he happened to end up in the
least
desirable position.
Jurgen Habermas
Habermas’ Concept of Justice

Notions of law and deliberative

democracy

Discourse Ethics
Discourse Ethics
 also called argumentation
ethics 2) to set the
 communication-centered moral ethics of
discourse
framework, which can be
employed by a group of individuals 1) to find ethical
truths through
or by organizations to develop and discussion
challenge ethical standards
 Cognitive

Discourse Ethics

Justifiability Universalizability
Cognitive
 All moral problems and issues can be solved by reason or intellect
 Reason is capable of attaining moral truth
 The attainment of moral is through a form of social deliberation, not
individual moral deliberation
 Valid moral norms are not merely personal preferences, they have
intersubjective validity
 the better argument prevails
 Justifiability
 Justifiability of norms in the lifeworld

Lifeworld
the shared norms, meanings and understandings of men
that enable them to communicate, comprehend, and act in
a society

System World
a product of strategic action that serves only the
interest of the few groups or institutions;
manipulative in nature and is essentially controlled
by money and power
Universalizability

 draws an ethics oriented towards solidarity

 excludes and considers invalid any norm that could not meet with
the qualified assent of all who are or might be affected
 Participants in discourse must reach real consensus to produce a
valid norm which they themselves create and eventually become
subjected to it
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
-overly individualistic Discourse Ethics
-Norms must be publicly defendable and
no person should decide norms for the
entire group

Principle of Universalism
It is crucial for all parties involved
to engage in the exchange
Rules of Discourse:
Every subject with the competence to speak and act is
allowed to take part in discourse

a) Everyone is allowed to question any assertion whatever.

b) Everyone is allowed to introduce any assertion whatever into the
discourse.
c) Everyone is allowed to express his attitudes, desires, and needs

No speaker may be prevented, by internal or external coercion,

from exercising his rights as laid down in the first two rules
Justice, therefore for Habermas refers to appli
cation of valid norms, the universalizable nor
ms
(contained in lifeworld) where rational men ar
e
subjected to and continually have produced t
hem
as circumstances or real life situations require
The idea of justice is arrived through
deliberative democracy in three reasons:
(1)
1.It allows moral reasons to be given for the validity of
norms.
(2)
It allows the addressees of the norm to be the authors of
the norm.
(3)
It provides for the discursively rational, and therefore,
intersubjective, justification of moral norms.
THANK YOU