1211 - 0442 1 / 2010 Rawls ’ two principles of justice : their adoption by rational self - interested individuals Alexandra Dobra
نویسنده
چکیده
The present paper aims in a first stage, to exploit succinctly the cardinal argument – the contract argument-acquainted in " A Theory of Justice " , which provides incentives for the two principles' general adoption. In a second stage, a discussion appraising the feasibility of these two principles and their subsequent empirical adoption will be dealt with. This contributes to the provision of counter-arguments and the highlighting of weaknesses.
منابع مشابه
Pragmatic Elements of Rawls’s Theory of Justice
In this article, in order to demonstrate the pragmatic elements of Rawls’s viewpoint, the developmental path of his A Theory of Justice shall first be investigated. This development has two phases: In the first phase, justice has an ethical-philosophical basis. In A Theory of Justice, this phase is specifically shown under the title of theory of justice. In the second phase, justice has no phil...
متن کاملJustice among Peoples and Decency of Iranian People
In his book The Law of Peoples, John Rawls described an international society inwhich there are enemies and friends seeking their goals by deferent means.Rawls introduced us principles as the fundamental rights of every people. Thepeople who reserve these rights can sustain in the world. Although this theoryis supposed to be part of liberal foreign policy, the peoples Rawls talks aboutare not n...
متن کاملEnhancing John Rawls's Theory of Justice to Cover Health and Social Determinants of Health.
The vast improvements in medical technology reviled the crucial role of social determinants of health for the etiology, prevalence and prognosis of diseases. This changed the content of the right to health concept from a demand of health services, to a claim of having access to all social determinants of health. Thus, the just allocation of scarce resources of health and social determinants of ...
متن کاملA Dialectic of Justice: Critiquing Social Conventions and Motivating Practice
Socrates’ infamous question, “What is Justice?” in Plato’s Republic, spawned a debate for philosophers (and societies), and the answers continue to be important and contested today. The diversity of approaches and persistence of disagreement has inclined some contemporary philosophers to adopt a position of moral relativism. Relativism is the thesis that there are many equally valid frameworks ...
متن کامل1 Justice Is Not Equality
This essay disputes G. A. Cohen’s claim that John Rawls’s argument for the difference principle involves an argument from moral arbitrariness to equality and then an illicit move away from equality. Moreover, the claim that an argument from moral arbitrariness establishes equality as the essential distributive justice ideal is found wanting. Rescuing Justice and Equality is an original, subtle,...
متن کامل