Introduction
The concept of justice depends on the balance between individual rights and the common good. Various philosophers proposed theories of justice varying in the extent to which individual liberties could be restricted for the sake of society. In this paper, I will present my view of justice and link it to Rawls’s theory. Further, I will discuss utilitarianism, which is a social philosophy contrasting with Rawls’s theory.
Main Discussion
In my opinion, justice is the principle of treating all people fairly. In my new society, all people would receive equal treatment from other individuals and organizations regardless of their gender, race, and other inborn characteristics. They would also have equal opportunities in education, career, and other aspects. The opportunities would depend on people’s ability to perform the required tasks and not on their descent or other task-unrelated features. For example, if a woman has the necessary qualifications for the leadership position, she should not be rejected in favor of a less qualified male candidate. Furthermore, under my concept of justice, people should receive equal punishments for similar misdeeds. For example, if one student is suspended for truancy, the other should receive the same punishment for the same misbehavior. It would be unjust if the other student’s misconduct were condoned because he or she was the headmaster’s child.
The social philosophy similar to my vision of justice is Rawls’s theory. Rawls based his beliefs on the social contract theory and viewed justice as fairness (“Introduction to philosophy,” 2017). His model is grounded on two principles: equal liberty and difference. The equal liberty principle stipulates that all people should have minimum natural rights and should be treated equally (Mitchell, 2019). According to the difference principle, people can be treated differently only if it will lead to the improvement of the lives of the most disadvantaged individuals (Mitchell, 2019). Rawls’s theory also presents the concept of the original position, which denotes a hypothetical state in which people do not know their position in society. The original position was regarded by Rawls as the appropriate starting point for developing just rules for society.
If I applied Rawls’s theory to my new society, I would start by identifying laws and rules from the original position. We would gather and assume that we know nothing about our societal position: our race, income, gender, ability status, and sexual orientation would be unknown to ourselves. From this position, we would establish rules that would not infringe on our rights regardless of whether we happen to be men or women, white or black, have a disability, or belong to the LGBTQ group. The original position would influence the structure of my society so that leadership positions could be equally occupied by men and women, and minorities would not be the most economically disadvantaged populations. The difference principle could also fit my new society without causing injustice because differences result in oppression only when they are perceived as hierarchical (“Social identities,” 2017). For example, if an entrepreneur creates jobs in compliance with labor regulations and enables the least well-off people to take those jobs, this entrepreneur can expect greater financial support for his or her business.
A contrasting theory is utilitarianism, which defines the good in terms of pleasure. Under this theory, the right actions are those resulting in the greatest amount of pleasure in the world (Mitchell, 2019). The key distinction between utilitarianism and Rawls’s theory is that the former focuses on individuals’ lives, while the latter considers society at large. Although utilitarianism also pays attention to society, it posits that society is just a sum of its parts, so if individuals strive to increase their own happiness, society will be happier as a whole.
Conclusion
To sum up, my society would be based on the concept of justice as fairness in alignment with Rawls’s theory. According to Rawls, people should be treated equally, and differences in treatment can occur only if they benefit the least well-off groups of the population. In contrast, utilitarianism posits that all people should increase their own happiness, thus boosting the happiness of the entire society.
References
Introduction to philosophy. (2017). South University. Web.
Mitchell, H. B. (2019). Roots of wisdom: A tapestry of philosophical traditions (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Social identities. (2017). South University. Web.