Justice as Fairness

John Rawls
 Act, Consequence, Virtue
and Justice:
Review: Why is it wrong to lie?

 Utilitarianism: because the (long-term)

benefit (utility) for those affected by
the lie is less than the cost.
 Act, Consequence, Virtue
and Justice:
Review: Why is it wrong to lie?
 Kant’s deontology
 You can not universalize a rule such as
“Always lie when it is to your advantage”;
 The rule “I have a right to decide when to

tell the truth or lie” treats others as means

to your goals, not ends in themselves.
 Act, Consequence, Virtue
and Justice:
Review: Why is it wrong to lie?
 Virtue ethics:
 practice of veracity and honesty as
virtues allows persons to discern
discretion = the mean between
falseness and transparency, relative to
persons and situations.
 Justice and Ethical Norms
 Ideas of justice expand the context of
wrongs beyond individual interactions to
society as a whole:
 “Society,” as well as individuals, is said to be
wronged by crime when crime is unpunished;
 “Society,” as well as individuals - is said to be
harmed when tort injuries to individuals or
groups are not redressed by law.
 Types of Justice
 Distributive justice: basis for (justification of)
pattern of resource distribution in a society; i.e.
norms of fairness
 Retributive justice: basis for classifying wrongs
as crimes, determining guilt, norms of
punishment
 Resistive justice: compensation for injury:
beach of contract, duty; norms of equity
 Justice as Fairness:
John Rawls’ Theory of Justice
 Rawls’ theory focuses:
 NOT on foreseeable results of an action;
 NOT on right or wrong principles motivating
the action;
 NOT on virtues of character, but
 ON SOCIAL INSTUTITONS WITHIN WHICH
ACTIONS AND POLICIES ARE DETERMINED
Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Definition and Principles
 Justice is:
 A virtue of social institutions, measured
by fairness in allocating benefits and
burdens, defined by two basic
principles:
 Liberty

 Difference
 Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Liberty
 Rawls’ “Liberty Principle”
“Each person participating in a practice
(or affected by it) has an equal right
to the most extensive liberty
compatible with a like liberty for all.”
 Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Difference
 Rawls’ “Difference Principle”
Inequalities is goods are arbitrary unless
 It is reasonable to expect that they will
work to the advantage of the least
advantaged; and
 The positions and offices to which they
attach (or from which they may be
gained) are open to all, under conditions
of fair competition
 Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Least Advantaged
 Who are the “least advantaged”?

 Those with lowest expectations for/

access to “primary goods” = “what
free and equal persons need as
citizens”
 Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Basic Goods
 Rawls specifies five kinds of such goods:
1. Basic rights and liberties (freedom of
thought, liberty of conscience)
2. Freedom of movement, free choice of
occupation
3. Powers and prerogatives of offices &
positions of responsibility;
4. Income and wealth
 Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Basic Goods
 Rawls specifies five kinds of such goods:
5. Social bases for self-respect – “aspects of
basic institutions normally essential if
citizens are to have a lively sense of their
worth as persons & advance their ends with
self-confidence”.
 Those who lack access these goods are
“least advantaged”
 Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
Justifying Rawls’ Claims
 The “original position”: assume a group of
 Rational, self-interested individuals
 Who know that there will be competition for
scarce resources;
 But do not know what natural advantages or
disadvantages they will possess, or
 What value beliefs or preferences will guide
them
Justice as Fairness: John Rawls
 Given these assumptions what principles
would these rational, self-interested
individuals choose to guide distribution of
benefits and burdens in their society?

 Rawls claims that persons in this imaginary

“original position” would adopt versions of
the liberty and difference principles.