Ad
related to: rawls theory of justice weaknesses and goals examples
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A Theory of Justice is a 1971 work of political philosophy and ethics by the philosopher John Rawls (1921–2002) in which the author attempts to provide a moral theory alternative to utilitarianism and that addresses the problem of distributive justice (the socially just distribution of goods in a society).
Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical" is an essay by John Rawls, published in 1985. [1] In it he describes his conception of justice. It comprises two main principles of liberty and equality; the second is subdivided into fair equality of opportunity and the difference principle .
In his book A Theory of Justice, John Rawls outlines his famous theory about justice as fairness. The theory consists of three core components: [4] the equality of people in rights and liberties; the equality of opportunities for all; and; an arrangement of economic inequalities focused on benefit maximisation for those who are least advantaged.
By attempting to enhance the perspective which his readers should take when thinking about justice, Rawls hoped to show the supposed conflict between freedom and equality to be illusory. Rawls's A Theory of Justice (1971) includes a thought experiment he called the "original position." The intuition motivating its employment is this: the ...
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement is a 2001 book of political philosophy by the philosopher John Rawls, published as a restatement of his 1971 classic A Theory of Justice (1971). [1] The restatement was made largely in response to the significant number of critiques and essays written about Rawls's 1971 book on this subject.
Luck egalitarianism is a view about egalitarianism [1]: 10 espoused by a variety of egalitarian and other political philosophers.According to this view, justice demands that variations in how well-off people are should be wholly determined by the responsible choices people make and not by differences in their unchosen circumstances.
Overlapping consensus is a term coined by John Rawls [1] in A Theory of Justice and developed in Political Liberalism.The term overlapping consensus refers to how supporters of different comprehensive normative doctrines—that entail apparently inconsistent conceptions of justice—can agree on particular principles of justice that underwrite a political community's basic social institutions.
The Habermas–Rawls debate is the exchange which took place between John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas in The Journal of Philosophy in 1995. One major point of misunderstanding was Rawls's emphasis on social primary goods in a debate that included Habermasian notions of the public and common good .