Deck 25: John Rawls

Question 1

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls states, "Injustice, then, is simply inequalities that are not to the benefit of all." Do you agree with this claim? Why or why not? How does this conception of injustice manifest itself in Rawls's theory?

Answer 1

No Answer

Question 2

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-What objection does Rawls raise to classical utilitarianism? How does his theory differ from utilitarianism? Which do you think is preferable, and why?

Answer 2

No Answer

Question 3

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Write an essay critically examining one of the principles of justice that Rawls endorses. First, state the principle and briefly explain what it implies for the way society ought to be structured. Then present what you take to be the strongest objection to the principle. Do you find the principle plausible? Why or why not?

Answer 3

No Answer

Question 4

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-What is the principle of redress, and how does it inform Rawls's theory? Do you agree with the principle? Why or why not?

Question 5

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-What is the original position and what role does it play in Rawls's theory? Do you think consideration of the original position is useful in constructing a theory of justice? Why or why not?

Question 6

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-What two principles of justice does Rawls endorse? Do you find them plausible? Describe what you take to be the most serious objection to one of these principles, and how you think Rawls would respond to it.

Question 7

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-How does Rawls think that one should go about justifying a conception of justice (whether his social contract conception, or any other)? How does his view contrast with other views about the justification of moral claims? Is the method that Rawls provides a plausible one?

Question 8

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls conceives of the original contract as one to:

A) enter a particular society.
B) set up a particular form of government.
C) establish the principles of justice for the basic structure of society.
D) establish the content of morality.

Question 9

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-The purpose of the veil of ignorance is to:

A) prevent contractors from adopting principles of justice that unfairly advantage themselves.
B) make the decision of which principles of justice to adopt simpler and easier.
C) ensure that the principles of justice selected are not too complicated for ordinary people to follow.
D) all of the above.

Question 10

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls conceives of the parties in the original position as:

A) benevolent.
B) malevolent.
C) mutually disinterested.
D) greedy egoists.

Question 11

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls argues that parties in the original position would not accept utilitarianism because:

A) it is too difficult to determine which policies would maximize happiness.
B) doing so would be too risky.
C) it requires us to do unjust things, such as executing innocent people.
D) they would be behind the veil of ignorance and thus would never have heard of utilitarianism.

Question 12

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls's theory consists of two parts:

A) an interpretation of the original position, and a set of principles that would be accepted there.
B) an analysis of "justice" and a theory of how we acquired the concept.
C) a theory of moral language and a theory of moral properties.
D) a description of our existing social institutions and a critique of them.

Question 13

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that the conditions he places on the original position are intended to:

A) re-create the setting of our ancestors, before the existence of our current social institutions.
B) allow us to decide on principles of justice without making reference to human psychology.
C) place reasonable restrictions on the arguments one can make for principles of justice.
D) make his theory simpler.

Question 14

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that the original position corresponds to:

A) to the first principles in the traditional theory of the social contract.
B) to the basic assumptions in the traditional theory of the social contract.
C) to the state of nature in the traditional theory of the social contract.
D) none of the above.

Question 15

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls maintains that a society satisfying his principles of justice comes as close as a society can to:

A) being a voluntary scheme.
B) being fair.
C) being a place where the members are autonomous.
D) all of the above.

Question 16

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-According to Rawls, the natural distribution of talents is:

A) perfectly equal.
B) just.
C) unjust.
D) none of the above.

Question 17

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that a conception of justice should be justified by:

A) deducing it from self-evident premises.
B) direct acquaintance via moral intuition.
C) the mutual support of many considerations, which it fits into one coherent view.
D) none of the above.

Question 18

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-In his characterization of utilitarianism, Rawls claims that the two main concepts of ethics are:

A) good and evil.
B) duty and obligation.
C) the right and the good.
D) virtue and vice.

Question 19

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that when his two principles come into conflict:

A) neither takes precedence over the other.
B) the first principle (concerning liberty) takes precedence over the second (concerning inequality).
C) the second principle (concerning inequality) takes precedence over the first (concerning liberty).
D) none of the above.

Question 20

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that the concepts of justice and fairness are one and the same.

Question 21

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls follows economic theory and defines "rationality" as the taking of the most effective means to given ends.

Question 22

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that a conception of justice ought to be deduced from self-evident premises.

Question 23

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls objects to utilitarianism on the grounds that it does not take seriously the distinction between persons.

Question 24

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-According to Rawls, in justifying a conception of justice we try to attain reflective equilibrium.

Question 25

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-The original position is best conceived of as an assembly of possible persons.

Question 26

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Behind the veil of ignorance, people have no knowledge of human psychology.

Question 27

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
The social contract theory, which has roots in Plato and was developed by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant, grounds moral requirements in social agreements made for the sake of mutual advantage. Rawls presents a novel social contract theory, which has two main parts. The first part of the theory identifies the correct principles of justice as those "that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." To ensure that the principles selected by contractors are fair, Rawls imposes a crucial restriction on the "original position" from which the contractors select principles. In Rawls's theory, the correct principles of justice are those that would be chosen from behind a veil of ignorance, whereby individuals are stripped of any particular knowledge about themselves, their social position, or their conception of the good. In putting forward this idea of the original position, Rawls claims that he is simply making vivid "the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for the principles of justice."
Rawls maintains that contractors in the original position would agree on two principles of justice. First, "each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others." Second, "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all." The first of these principles is lexically prior to the second - i.e., the first principle (concerning liberty) trumps the second (concerning inequality). The guiding thought behind the two principles, Rawls claims, is that inequalities can be just only when they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls points out that his theory thus differs sharply from utilitarianism, according to which we ought to maximize well-being, and shares commonalities with Kant's moral philosophy.
-Rawls claims that the principles of justice are analogous to categorical imperatives.