All about Rawls, his Theory and Critics

• 
• Intro: The idea of justice occupies centre stage in political philosophy. John Rawls famously described justice as ‘the first virtue of social institutions’. He was a social liberal and an egalitarian.

• context: Behavioualism could not explain rise of feminist move, black rights movement, etc. In this context Rawls theory of justice came as a respite in 1971 and led to revival of political philosophy as a discipline.

• His theory of justice:
• Social contract entered into by people who are rational,moral and mutually disinterested and in original position and under veil of ignorance(meaning they know nothing about themselves or others but know the basic rules of a society  )would be a result of rational debate among rational people to arrive at rational principles of Justice for distribution of primary goods ( primary goods are those that help individuals achieve their desired goals in life. These include “rights, liberties, opportunities, income and wealth.”)
• Says rational choice would be adoption an option whose worst outcome is better than worst outcome than any other choice. If you choose liberalism and you become the poorest, you are fucked. If you choose socialism and you are the richest, you are fucked. But if you choose welfare state, whether you are rich or poor(as rich would be taxed for you), you would be taken care of.
• Rawls- justice is not about eliminating inequality but in managing it as inequality is bound to emerge even after equal liberty and opportunity as people differ in talents. It would be injustice to repress a person who is hardworking and talented. 
• calls his welfarism as democratic equality.
• Gives maximin principle-
  
• Calls his theory as purely procedural free from any ideological bias.
• Principle of Justice should be in accordance to our intuition, heart and mind should say one thing ( reflective eqbm)
• Lexical order of distribution of primary goods-
• Equal liberty to all
• Equal opportunity to all
• Difference principle ( regulates inequalities occurring after the first two principles: it only permits inequalities that work to the advantage of the worst-off. By guaranteeing the worst-off in society a fair deal, Rawls compensates for naturally occurring inequalities (talents that one is born with)
• There are two options to manage the inequality:
• Everyone is equal but everyone is poor
• Some are rich as compared to others. A part of the wealth is utilised for the welfare of the poor
• which option would poor choose- Second option as in that at least the poor have a hope on moving up the ladder. 
• Rich would agree as Rawls brings concept of luck that luck too has played a role in making them rich. Hence some portion of their wealth must be given to those who are not that lucky.
• His theory of justice talks of looking after the least disadvantaged. This is in line with Gandhi’s talisman and DDU’s antyodaya who talk of last person of the social ladder.
• Rawls difference principle is the model used by democracies world over that are based on progressive taxation and welfarism in favour of the poor.
• 
  Norman Barry said that Rawls has applied the “chain principle” and argued that weakest link in chain, ie the disadvantaged sections are as important as the strongest chain.

• Criticism:

• By feminists-
• He has made difference in personal and political . His theory of Justice tries to bridge inequality only in the political sphere and not in personal sphere .

• By libertarians-
• 
• Robert Nozick -
• gives entitlement theory of justice in his book Anarchy,State and Utopia as an alternative to Ralws TOJ
• For him inequality in society is right if it is the result of competition.
• Says minimal state is inspiring and right .  Intervention only in extreme cases- ex if there is a single source of water and someone claims monopoly over it, then the state must intervene.
• Say progressive taxation is bonded labour, aggression on personality of man and against human dignity
• Do not believe in historical injustice.
• Not in favour of welfare state but a night watchman state.

• By social liberals:
• Amartya Sen -
• says Rawls considers abstract individuals negotiating in abstract situation (original position). Sen suggests social choice, that is the real choice of people in real situations.
• says a grand idea of justice is neither possible nor desirable.
• Only distribution of goods is not the end. People's cpacity must be made equal for them to utilize the goods.

1. 
   
   
2. Dworkin:
1. 
2. Rawls fails to distiguish the worst off based on choice and circumstances. For dworkin only the people who are worst off because of circumstances(brute luck) need to be compensated.

• 
  value-pluralism postulates that in many cases, such incompatible values may be incommensurable, in the sense that there is no objective ordering of them in terms of importance. Value pluralism is opposed to value monism.
• Berlin criticises because Rawls gives lexical order of values: liberty—> equality of opportunity—> difference principle. this shows an inherent supremacy of one value over the other which is against the spirit of Berlin's value pluralism

• By communitarians-
• we never look at reality through naked eyes. We always wear the glasses of our community. You are not born in original position and can never be abstracted to original position. They are right and hence called realists.

1. Alasdair mcIntyre

1. Charles Taylor- man is situated self.
   
   
   
2. Michael Sandel- book- liberalism and limits of Justice says man is embedded self .  
1. Man is embedded in a network of social relations.His sense of Justice is not different from his community's sense of Justice .What I think is my choice is actually my community’s choice. Says a stripped down individual abstracted from his social ,economic and cultural contexts will be unable to make choices, as proposed by Rawls.
   
   
   
3. Michael Walzer-book- the spheres of Justice says there cannot be any universal principles of Justice.
1. Justice is art of differentiation rather than science of universalism.
2. Different goods ought to be distributed differently.
3. Conception of Justice vary from society to society.
4. There cannot be one principle of justice for all social institutions.
5. The principle of justice in political sphere cannot be applied in economic sphere.
   

• Rawls’ response:
• Rawls gives Concept of overlapping consesus
• It reflects consensus of people wrt principles governing common issues. People may not have same reasons but overlapping reasons to arrive at the same conclusions. People in western plural societies will develop overlapping if not overarching consensus on political conception of justice. Overlapping consensus will emerge from intuition of people living in a democratic culture. He also points toleration, public reasoning and reciprocity as features of democratic culture due to which people will develop overlapping consensus.
• In his second book political liberalism Rawls gives political conception of Justice saying his theory is only for Western societies and only in political sphere. 

Conclusion- Nozick, one of the critics of Rawls calls him a reference point for contemporary political philosophers. Rawls theory of justice has started what has been rightly called “ golden age in theorising about justice.”