Rawls’ s theory of justice provides guidance for how to solve the deep unequal distribution of social values in America. The theory of justice has some flaws, which Rawls could not respond to perfectly. These flaws imply that Rawls’s theory is idealistic and needs to be developed.
Rawls thinks that consequentialism controls the political and economic spheres in America and leads to many social problems in that society, especially inequality of wealth and political rights (Rawls, 1971). In order to relieve these problems, he proposed his own theory. The goal of Rawls’s theory of justice is to defend and to improve the liberty for the most members of a society (Rawls, 1971). Rawls argues that, generally, all social values, such as liberty, opportunity, …show more content…
One of the flaws is about the theory’s main assumption, called veil of ignorance. Veil of ignorance is just an ideal situation with no base in reality, so its rationality is questionable. Veil of Ignorance suggests that everyone should ignore their own social conditions, such as their social class, education level and their positions in the society, so people could only consider what is good for an individual without prior knowledge (Rawls, 1971). Here is a question: could a person deprived of his/her self-identity think rationally? In other words, in reality, we cannot judge things without consideration from our own position; and if we are deprived self-identity, it is imaginable to think as an incomplete individual. Rawls’ theory is based on this veil of ignorance and it will collapse once people cannot think behind the veil in …show more content…
While discussing the second principle of justice, Rawls proposes his difference principle, which suggests that a difference between people can be allowed only if it benefits the weak people (Rawls, 1971). Moreover, Rawls also proposes his anti-efficiency principle, which suggests that a distribution can be inefficient, but it must be just (Rawls, 1971). This means justice is prior to efficiency. What matters is that, in the status quo, people did not fully prepare for such a socialism-oriented idea. At least now, people act in a society, such as operating a business, mostly for their private interests rather than others’. By this meaning, pursuing own interests is the engine of a society. In the status quo, it is hard to affirm that the members of a society have achieved a moral stage to give up considering their own interests and to obey Rawls’s principles. The disaster caused by the elimination of private property, in the collective economy of China and the Soviet Union in the 20th century, shows us pure equality is horrible, because it entices people just enjoy rights and avoid
Rawls thinks that consequentialism controls the political and economic spheres in America and leads to many social problems in that society, especially inequality of wealth and political rights (Rawls, 1971). In order to relieve these problems, he proposed his own theory. The goal of Rawls’s theory of justice is to defend and to improve the liberty for the most members of a society (Rawls, 1971). Rawls argues that, generally, all social values, such as liberty, opportunity, …show more content…
One of the flaws is about the theory’s main assumption, called veil of ignorance. Veil of ignorance is just an ideal situation with no base in reality, so its rationality is questionable. Veil of Ignorance suggests that everyone should ignore their own social conditions, such as their social class, education level and their positions in the society, so people could only consider what is good for an individual without prior knowledge (Rawls, 1971). Here is a question: could a person deprived of his/her self-identity think rationally? In other words, in reality, we cannot judge things without consideration from our own position; and if we are deprived self-identity, it is imaginable to think as an incomplete individual. Rawls’ theory is based on this veil of ignorance and it will collapse once people cannot think behind the veil in …show more content…
While discussing the second principle of justice, Rawls proposes his difference principle, which suggests that a difference between people can be allowed only if it benefits the weak people (Rawls, 1971). Moreover, Rawls also proposes his anti-efficiency principle, which suggests that a distribution can be inefficient, but it must be just (Rawls, 1971). This means justice is prior to efficiency. What matters is that, in the status quo, people did not fully prepare for such a socialism-oriented idea. At least now, people act in a society, such as operating a business, mostly for their private interests rather than others’. By this meaning, pursuing own interests is the engine of a society. In the status quo, it is hard to affirm that the members of a society have achieved a moral stage to give up considering their own interests and to obey Rawls’s principles. The disaster caused by the elimination of private property, in the collective economy of China and the Soviet Union in the 20th century, shows us pure equality is horrible, because it entices people just enjoy rights and avoid