Theories of Justice

Justice: Introduction
Justice is a concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law,
natural law, religion, fairness, or equity, along with the punishment of the
breach of said ethics. The term ‘social justice’ in the modern sense has been
used to ensure social well being of the people. It is generally argued that in
conditions of social justice, people are not be discriminated against, nor
their welfare and well-being constrained or prejudiced on the basis of
gender, sexuality, religion, political affiliations, age, race, belief, disability,
location, social class, socioeconomic circumstances, or other characteristic
of background or group membership. social justice is concerned with the
just distribution of resources, opportunities, and privileges in the society as
well as wages, profits, housing, medical care, welfare schemes to meet the
principle of justice. In a word, social justice is all about ‘who should get
what and how’.
Types of Justice
Social justice
This conception of justice broadens the theory of justice beyond political
and legal borders. It advocates the social treatment and opportunities for
individuals and communities in a state. To put explicitly, it suggest that all
people should have equal access to wealth, health, well-being, justice,
privileges, opportunities, regardless of different circumstances.
Political justice
Political justice refers to the use of the judicial process for the purpose of
power sharing in politics. For example the provision of universal adult
suffrage, separate electorate, reservation policy etc. deal with political
justice.
Economic justice
The theory of justice aimed at achieving equal economic opportunities for
all individuals and to establish a foundation to lead a life of dignity and
opportunity. It mainly deals with economic policies of state.
Legal justice
Simply put, it stands for the justice as it is enforced by legal entities, in
accordance with the laws established. It is more concerned with following
the just procedures (procedure established by law) than upholding the value
of justice. Consequently, legal justice may or may not comply with other
forms of justice. For example the abortion may be legal in eyes of law in
some states, but it may not enjoy the ‘just’ status in eyes of community or
religion.
Distributive justice
It deals with the justice at the level of distribution. Distribution of resources
by the state. Various schools have different opinions to achieve such justice.
Classical liberal suggest least state intervention to allocate resources.
Nozick suggests state intervention only when the life is at threat. Dworkin
has suggested just initial distribution. John Rawls suggest difference
principle to establish social security net for disadvantaged sections. And
Amartya Sen has suggested ‘capacity building’ approach to achieve the goal
of distributive justice. Socialists take this concept to another level when
they suggest state ownership of industries and extreme intervention of state
to ensure ‘just’ allocation of resources.
John Rawl on Justice
Rawls is recognized as an American moral and political philosopher, and he
authored “A Theory of Justice” in 1971. He’s been referred to as the most
important ethics and political philosopher of the 20th century.
In his book, Rawls introduced the “Original Position” as an artificial device
when he developed the Principles of Justice theory. The device created a
hypothetical situation where members of the population can come to a
contractual agreement on the distribution of resources without one party
being seen to be more advantaged than the other.
Rawls is a firm opposer of utilitarianism, which held the view that just or
fair actions are the ones that bring the greatest amount of good for the
greatest number.
There are 2 principles given by Rawls
1. Principle of Equal Liberty
The principle of equal liberty is the first principle of justice to be derived
from the original position. It states that all citizens have an equal right to
basic liberties, which, according to Rawls, entails freedom of conscience,
expression, association, and democratic rights. Rawls added the right of
personal property as one of the basic liberties that individuals should have,
and that cannot be infringed or amended by the government. He, however,
excluded an absolute right to unlimited personal properties as part of the
basic liberties that people should have.
2. Principle of Equality
The principle of equality holds that economic principles should be arranged
in a way that they meet two requirements.
a. the least advantaged in society should receive a greater number of
benefits.
b. the economic inequalities should be arranged in a way that no
individual is blocked from occupying any position or office, regardless
of their ethnicity, sex, or social background.
Rawls argued that all individuals in the society should have fair equality
of opportunities and an equal chance as everybody else of similar natural
ability.
Objective of Study:
Theory of justice is a way to find a well ordered society. For a well-
ordered society there should be 2 elements:
1. advance the good of members and effective regulation
2. all people accept and know that all other people should accept the
same principle of justice
A well ordered society includes:
a. Circumstances of Justice
b. Original Position
c. Veil of Ignorance
d. Maximin Rule
Circumstances of Justice
Objective Circumstances:
Subjective Cirmstances:
Original Position
People have come together to device the principles. They are ‘mutually dis-
interested. Though they are mutually dis-interested, they understand that to
live in the society, they have to agree on some basic principles of cooperation.
They have come to determine the distribution of primary goods.
Every person has some rational plans, primary goods are needed to pursue
these rational plans. Rational plans means goals e.g. becoming IAS, Dr. etc.
Rational goals are secondary goods. For the secondary goods, we need some
primary goods. e.g. Liberty, Rights, Income, Wealth and Dignity.
People are kept behind the veil of ignorance. The purpose is to bring people in
original position hence in a thought experiment it is assumed that people do not
know particular facts about themselves. They only know some general facts,
means a general understanding of society, economics and psychology. They do
 not know which position they will be placed in, in that society. They may be rich
or poor, advantaged or disadvantaged, male, female or transgender.
Considering this these people have to decide what should be the system with
respect to the arrangement of primary goods. In the thought experiment, Rawls
wants to show that person will neither prefer liberty alone as libertarians think
nor equality alone as socialists think, any rational person behind the veil of
ignorance will require both – liberty as well as equality. Thus he ends up
justifying social welfare state/approach.

Veil of Ignorance
John Rawls' Veil of Ignorance is a thought experiment that suggests people should
imagine themselves behind a veil of ignorance that keeps them from knowing who
they are and identifying with their circumstances.
a. People can think about how societies should function more objectively when
they are unaware of their personal circumstances.
b. In order to determine the fundamental institutions and structures of a just
society, Rawls used the curtain of ignorance.
c. The decision-makers are presumptively acting solely in their interests. Still,
they are limited in their ability to choose principles that are advantageous to
their particular circumstances by the lack of information available to them.
d. Rawls believed that approaching tough issues through a veil of ignorance
and applying these principles can help decide more fairly how the rules of
society should be structured.

Maximin Rule
To determine the order of priority, Rawls believes that maximin principle is the
most rational way. Maximin principle implies 1) Any rational person would like
to maximize the benefits of any advantage he has. 2) Any rational person would
like to minimize the impact of any disadvantage if he has. 3) Any rational
person will put himself in both the situations. 1) What if he is best off? 2) What
if he is worst off?
People in the original position will consider different options and will ultimately
opt for the option whose worst outcome is better than the worst outcome of any
other option. e.g. If they only think they are most talented, hence they will not
have concern for equality but this choice will lead them in worst position, if
after removing the veil of ignorance they come to realize that they were least
advantaged. They will realize that they should have agreed for social security
net. Similarly if they think they may be worst off and just include equality and
ignore the liberty but once they come out of ignorance, they realize that they
were most advantaged, hence they will feel that they are now the worst off.
According to Rawls, any rational person will give primacy to thinking about the
advantages over disadvantages. Rational person will give priority to liberty over
equality.