Justice

Relfexive equilibrium and intuition:

first make theory with procedure and principles. then compare it with your intuition. intuition is moral judgement. after comparing, if it is in line, go with it. if not than adjust both to arrive at equilibrium which is reflexive equilibrium. this is against socratic dialectics.

Architechtonic concept (base), most important initiated with Plato (republic: concerning justice)

John Rawls:  

 

justice is first virtue of social institution, just as truth is first virtue of any system of thought people will adhere to social norms only if they find it just	Context problems in US (civil rights, black rights movement, feminist movements environmental movements, movements for disarmament, opposition to Vietnam war etc) so gave theory of justice in 1971 death of political theory under behaviouralism
Features of Rawls social liberal/ liberal egalitarian human dignity as core (Kant) rational theory - not based on prior values or biasness leave on rational procedure and accept the outcome universal theory social contract liberal theory (appears to) hence accused of propagating hegemony of liberalism purely procedural	Features of rawls greatest philosopher of 20th century revived political theory (philosophy) contemporary political philosophy is footnote to rawls reference point to all (Sen, Nozick, Dworkin, Berlin, Kimlicka)
Works of rawls Justice as Fairness (1958) Theory of Justice (1971) Book on Political Liberalism (1993) The laws of people (1999)	School of Thought school: social liberal/ Liberal egalitarian new theory of justice due to social unrest   all should agree (consensus) 'ultimate principles' which appear rational to all before his theory, utilitarian justice (GHGN) disregard for distributive justice, maximise national income, neglect of human dignity his theory based on Kant is deontological based on human dignity which Kant considers as 'Categorical Imperative' 'each person possesses  involiability founded on the principle of justice' Rawls adopted social contract (choice) rejected in liberalism due to utilitarianism adopted since contract shows human is rational good is not prior to right, rather determined by right opposed utilitarianism as human dignity is involiable
Intuitionism moral judgement intuition is moral judgement. we should do dialectics and bring 'reflexive equilibrium' action and thought in consonance first make theory with procedure and principles. then compare it with your intuition. intuition is moral judgement. after comparing, if it is in line, go with it. if not than adjust both to arrive at equilibrium which is reflexive equilibrium. this is against socratic dialectics. principle of justice in accordance to moral judgement otherwise soul not in peace follower of Kantian principle- right determines good since utilitarianism won't be in conformity with our moral judgement, it won't be sound principle of justice	Principles of justice each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive liberty, compatible with similar liberty for all social and economic inequalities are to be arranged in such a manner that both attached to the position and offices open to all reasonably expected to be in everybody's advantage (difference principle) [if some inequality leads to some acquiring greater wealth but that is used for tax and benefit is given to lower class, then such inequality is acceptable]
original position not hobbseian man (reasonable) live in society primary goods needed for rational plans	Principles of justice challenge convince others that his principles are just and universal purely procedural theory (no pre-conceived notion) concept of thought process used veil of ignorance, people know only general things don't know particular facts about themselves this is required to come at original position original position similar to state of nature people are not Hobbessian and have moral judgement came to determine distribution of primary goods primary goods rational plans (become IAS, etc) which are secondary goods require primary goods liberty and equality both important: (for people under veil of ignorance at orignial position) liberty>equality hence justified social liberal approach maximin principle: max advantage, minimum disadvantage people will think of having advantage over disadvantage hence they will not prefer absolute equality principle in lexical order liberty principle equality of opportunity difference principle: benefit worst disadvantaged
Democratic equality bring more equality equality needs to be democratised, make is more pro poor by affirmative actions rich agree since they are just poor agree since they are just and it is best for them it will make poor better off than worse off society will have more resources to help poor socialism is like sharing equal poverty talent vs advantage: way you are brought up	Rawls's views natural facts are not just or unjust how institutions deal with them make them just or unjust hence he supports affirmative action like progressive taxation, welfare state, social security society is like a chain, weakest link is as important as the strongest link
Critics
Socialists: difference principle is vulgar justification of inequality	Feminists:  susan molerokin             , carole pateman personal is political, rawls separates them Carole Giligan: ethics of care- care>justice (criticised for essential feminism) every society, men= justice, women= care ethics of care focus on human connectivity, emotions, self-sacrifice, whereas justice is based on individualism justice- rationality, care- emotions lead to stability, peace
Libertarian Nozick: entitlement theory of justice social justice: corruption (Hayek) minimal state is right and inspiring Rawls compromises liberty for sake of equality progressive taxation= bonded labour man should have absolute right over property similar to Locke (Nozick is used to explain US actions in Iraq) he allows state intervention if property is being destroyed	Social liberals Amartya Sen supports social choice: real persons negotiating in real life situations rational choice is based on Abstract Individual negotiating in abstract situation prefers consequential approach (Rawls: abstract people in abstract situation) Nyay>niti  (Realisation >procedure )(geeta, buddha) no formula will be acceptable to all  no formula appear rational to all Arjun's position was better than of Krishna (do duty) could have safe lives Buddha minimised sufferings instead of searching for some universal formula
COMMUNITARIAN: no universalist concept Walzer, Sandel sandel's criticism of Rawls conception of self: original position (dependent on commmunity) conception of community rawls vs communitarians 1st book: theory of justice universal principle based on rational principle communitarians: man not independent of society 2nd book: political liberalism answer to communitarian criticism limits principles of justice to political institutions theory only for liberal democracy, not applicable to others (irrationals) 3rd Book: Laws of People due to questions raised by Cosmopolitan scholars like Charles Beitz and Thomas Pogee differences should be accepted. rawls's original position atomistic rawls in response limited his theory to political sphere only only where democratic culture: book- political liberalism democracy: difference yet stable democratic societies accept difference people can live according to their 'comprehensive doctrines' (way of life) democratic political culture is based on  public reasoning principle of reciprocity toleration due to burden of judgement acceptance of difference overlapping consensus developed since people accept burden of judgement acceptance of difference Book: political liberalism differs from modus vivendi: compulsion by force minority accept to protect their rights, majority accept for stability against question of Charles Beitz and Thomas Pogee about taxation to north for payment to South, he rejects and gives concept of decent people (no difference principle inter-society) liberals (SEAsia)- book: laws of the people treat equal in treaty, non-intervention, human rights decent people peaceful, human rights, E.g.- South East Asian countries Political liberalism 3 principles of justice limited to political sphere only in wake of criticism from communitarians

Communitarians

reaction against libertarianism/liberalism focus:  importance of community (close kinship group) led to the idea of Resident Welfare Association, Community Policing

Liberalism led to  individual: isolated social political decline in social and political capital- Robert Putnam (book- Bowling Alone)- invest time in societies to make them functional like capital is needed to run industry, social capital is needed to run society Hannah Arendt's warning against rise of totalitarian if no public participation

Scholars Alex Dair McIntyer            , Charles Taylor Michael Sandel: liberalism and limits of justice- book criticised Rawls conception of self conception of community man is situated self 'Self is not prior to ends, but rather constituted by ends.' people are not abstract agents but moral agents (live in society) Rawls believes in individual autonomy because he comes from USA Michael Walzer;   book-sphere of justice no single principle of justice acceptable to all different forms of justice in different fields. eg- caste in india is just to society suggests to recognise differences different goods ought to be distributed differently for different reasons by different agents. All these differences arise from different understanding which is inevitable product of different backgrounds historically and culturally justice is not the science of homogenisation but art of differentiation Amitai Etizio: important personality

Communitarian vs liberalism individual atomistic for liberalism situated self- man not independent of culture (self is not prior to good, rather self is constituted by good) our choice are made by community in which we live, even when we might think ourselves to be independent community take organic view of society as against aggregate view taken by libertarians rights cultural relativists perspective of rights as against universalists there should be community specific rights state personal and political should not be separate libertarians consider to keep public sphere free of culture, religion and believe in universal citizenship, uniformity, uniform civil code, etc tradition is part of personal identity