Social Justice Flashcards
concept is
a general structure that encapsulates different things
conception is
a specification that concept obtained by filling out a detail
difference between good and right
good refers to an end, while right refers to the procedures and means.
justice as fairness is the idea that
justice is achieved when everyone has access to basic liberties and socio-economic arrangements always benefits the worst off.
difference principle is the idea that
inequalities should be arranged so that they benefit the worst-off people.
original position is the position in which
a person has no ascriptive characteristics like race, gender, or nationality
veil of ignorance is the principle that
individuals in the original position are unaware of their personal characteristics
procedural mechanisms are
procedures that are used to determine the fair distribution of social goods- fairness is also about using the right procedures, not just outcomes!
what are the 3 principles of justice
- basic equal liberties
- no discrimination and equality of opportunity
- the maximin principle
justice as entitlement is the idea that (nozick)
justice begins with protecting ones holdings & freedom is being able to decide what to do with one’s holdings.
libertarianism
advocates for minimal government internvention in social and economic affairs
imperfect procedural justice is
when even if there’s a correct outcome, there may not be a procedure that guarantees it.
pure procedural justice is
when the outcome isn’t influenced by arbitrary forces like power, or chance. (e.g veil of ignorance)
what’s a problem with procedural justice? (hint: its about hypothetical consent)
in procedural justice, people focus too much on hypothetical consent, and don’t pay attention to actual consent. for example, if a poor person sells their land to a rich person without realizing how much its really worth, that’s not really fair.
objection to rawls- risk aversion
why would we assume that people would be careful in thier standing- rawls wrongly assumes that people are rational, and cautious
objection to rawls- the priority of liberty
some pay prefer to trade off basic liberties for the sake of economic gains.
objection to rawls- redistribution
the veil of ignorance justifies massive redistribution. without inequalities people will have no incentive to do one job rather than another- hence no incentive to do work that’s useful to society.
objection to rawls- hypothetical contract
the idea of a contract is too abstract and doesn’t provide a concrete plan for how to implement these principles. also, its impossible to get everyone to agree on a set of principles of justice.
objections to rawls- egoism
rawls reinforces the misunderstanding that humans are egoistic.
objection to rawls- the private sphere
rawls looks at how we should reorganize the public sphere (what we owe each other as citizens) but this ultimately disenfrenchasises women because the structural abuses in the private sphere aren’t a part of justice.
objections to rawls *6)
- risk aversion
- priority of liberty
- redistribution
- hypothetical contract
- egoism
- the private sphere
3 ways to earn something legitimately
- acquisition- uninhabited lands being acquired
- transfer- assuming all transfers are voluntary (the market)
- rectification: if a transfer is considered unjust, then its the responsibility of society to redistribute resouces back to their rightful owners.
critiques of nozick’s view of owning property
critique of nozick (3)
- minimal state isn’t enough to protect citizens from certain types of harm
- nozick’s emphasis on individual rights ignores important social and collective goods that can’t be achieved by individuals alone.
- his argument justifies radical inequality
what’s nozicks entitlement theory aka justice in holdings?
individuals have a right to acquire and transfer holdings (i.e., property and assets) as they see fit, as long as those holdings were acquired justly.
compare rawls & nozick in terms of procedural mechanisms
reawls thinks having fair and unbiased procedures is importan, and nozick thinks the role of the state is to protect against unjust infringements- and that’s it
what’s the idea of justice as desert
people should get what they deserve- it also follows hte logic of the amrkets- thus hard work and talent are rewarded
- associated with meritocracy.
what’s the problem with justice as desert?
its unfair to only reward natural talents via the market because they don’t make sense from a moral pov.
do rawls and nozick rely on justice as desert?
NO
what are the consequences of rawls’ claims on social vs. global justice (2)
cosmopolitanism & statism
what are cosmopolitanism and statism?
cosmopolitanism and tatism are implications of the view that justice is desert.
- cosmopolitanism argues that all humans are fundamentally equal and deserve to live in just societies, and therefore we should defend liberties without regards to borders.
- statism argues that we owe more to our co-nationals than to people in other countries.
what’s hayek’s idea of social justice
the idea of social justice is a category mistake- you can’t say society is something, society isn’t an agent that can be just or unjust.
- coercive redistribution by the state is unjustifiable
how does rawls disagree with justice as desert?
rawls thinks luck plays a significant role in determining people’s earning potential.
