3 of 19

WHO WAS JOHN RAWLS - HISTORICAL CONTEXT

John Rawls (1921–2002)

Professor at Harvard University

📘 A Theory of Justice (1971)

Context of the Time:

Post–World War II liberal democracies
Cold War tensions (capitalism vs communism)
Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.
Dominance of utilitarianism in Anglo-American philosophy

Core Concern:

How can a democratic society justify inequality while respecting freedom and equality?

4 of 19

HOW DOES RAWLS DEFINE JUSTICE

Justice

Concerns how benefits and burdens are distributed

About what people are owed as members of society

Social Justice

Focuses on the fair distribution of:

Resources (income, wealth)
Opportunities (education, jobs)
Rights and freedoms

Rawls focuses on justice at the institutional level.

5 of 19

SOCIETY?

Basic Structure of Society

Well-Ordered Society

6 of 19

THE BASIC STRUCTURE

The basic structure of society refers to the major institutions that shape people’s life chances:

Constitution → Organises political power and protects basic rights
Legal system → Creates and enforces laws
Economic system → Distributes income, wealth, and opportunities
Education system → Shapes access to opportunity and social mobility

Rawls argues that justice should primarily apply to what he calls the “basic structure” of society.

The basic structure refers to the major institutions that profoundly shape our life chances — long before we make individual choices.

This includes the constitution, which determines how political power is organised and how rights are protected.

The legal system, which creates and enforces laws.

The economic system, which determines how income, wealth, and jobs are distributed.

And the education system, which affects access to opportunity and social mobility.

Rawls focuses on these institutions because they have deep, long-term effects on individuals’ prospects. They influence whether someone is born into poverty or privilege, whether they have access to education, and whether they can meaningfully exercise their freedoms.

For Rawls, justice is not mainly about judging individual actions. It is about designing fair background institutions that structure society itself.

7 of 19

THE WELL-ORDERED SOCIETY

A society is well-ordered when:

Everyone accepts the same principles of justice
Basic institutions are publicly known to follow those principles
Citizens trust that others comply with them

Key Idea:

Stability arises from legitimacy — not coercion.

Rawls does not just want to identify principles of justice — he also wants those principles to sustain a stable society.

He introduces the idea of a “well-ordered society.” This is a society where everyone accepts the same principles of justice, and those principles are publicly recognized.

Importantly, the institutions of society — such as the legal system, the political system, and the economic structure — are known to follow those principles. They are not secretly biased or arbitrarily structured.

There is also mutual trust. Citizens believe that others are playing by the same fair rules.

For Rawls, stability should not come from fear or force. A society held together by repression is not truly just.

Instead, stability should come from legitimacy — from the fact that citizens see the system as fair and therefore willingly support it.

In this sense, justice is not only morally correct, but politically practical. Fair institutions generate long-term stability.

8 of 19

THE DOMINANT THEORY: UTILITARIANISM

“The greatest good for the greatest number”

Policies are judged by the total amount of happiness or welfare they produce

Strengths:

✔ Efficient

✔ Outcome-focused

✔ Simple decision rule

Problems (according to Rawls):

❌ Can justify sacrificing minorities

❌ Does not treat individuals as inviolable

❌ Ignores fairness in distribution

9 of 19

THE DILEMMA

A town of 100 people proposes a public park.

To build it:

1 family (5 people) must lose their home.

95 benefit / 5 suffer - What would you do?

10 of 19

THE ORIGINAL POSITION

Rawls proposes a thought experiment.

Imagine designing society’s rules without knowing your place in it.

Purpose:

To remove bias and self-interest
To ensure impartiality.

11 of 19

THE VEIL OF IGNORANCE

Behind the veil, you do not know your:

Class
Wealth
Race
Gender
Talents
Religion
Social status

You must assume you could be anyone. Rational people would choose rules that protect them if they ended up worst off.

12 of 19

JUSTICE, LUCK & MORAL ARBITRARINESS

Your talents, background, and social position are morally arbitrary.

You did not earn:

Your natural abilities
The family you were born into
The society you entered

Therefore:

Institutions should not allow luck alone to determine life outcomes.

13 of 19

2 PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE

Regulated Social & Economic Inequality

Equal Basic Liberties

i. Fair Equality of Opportunity

ii. The Difference Principle

14 of 19

FIRST PRINCIPLE:

Equal Basic Liberties

Each person has an equal right to:

Freedom of speech
Freedom of conscience
Political participation
Voting rights
Rule of law protections

These liberties cannot be traded for economic advantage.

Freedom has priority over efficiency.

15 of 19

SECOND PRINCIPLE (PART 1): fAIR Equality Of Opportunity

Not merely formal equality (no discrimination). But genuine fairness:

People with equal talent and effort should have equal prospects of success.

This may require:

Public education
Social support
Reducing structural disadvantage – no nepotism/’networking’ advantages

16 of 19

SECOND PRINCIPLE (PART 2):

The Difference Principle

Social and economic inequalities are permitted only if:

They benefit the least advantaged members of society.

Inequality is not the default. Equality is the baseline.

EXAMPLE:

Higher salaries for doctors may be justified if:

They create incentives (5-7 years of studying for no benefit ????)
Increase productivity
Generate tax revenue
Improve welfare systems

18 of 19

SECOND PRINCIPLE (PART 2):

The Difference Principle

Strict equality might:

Reduce incentives
Lower productivity
Shrink total resources available

Rawls allows inequality – but only when it improves the situation of the worst off.

Justice ≠ sameness.

Justice = fairness under uncertainty.

1 of 19

2 of 19