John+Rawls

=**__John Rawls__**=



__Biography:__
==== Born John Borden (Bordley) Rawls, John Rawls was a prominent philosopher of the middle-late 20th century. He was born on February 21, 1921 in Baltimore, Maryland. Rawls attended school in Baltimore then transferred to a school in Connecticut. After graduating, Rawls attended [|Princeton] University, where his interest in philosophy was sparked. A few years later, Rawls joined the army and fought in World War II. Rawls was moved after observing the bombings of Hiroshima and their horrific repercussions. He turned down the offer to become an official in the army, returned to Princeton and wrote a doctorate in moral philosophy. After marrying Margaret Fox in 1949, Rawls spent his first holiday together with his wife writing the index for a book on [|Nietzsche]. Meanwhile, Rawls individually wrote the index for [|A Theory of Justice]. In 1950, he received his PhD from Princeton and taught there for two years. Following this, Rawls departed and came back to America. In America Rawls went to Cornell University, where he ascended the social ranks and became an associate professor. In 1962, he became a full professor of philosophy at Cornell. Rawls later worked at the Massac husetts Institute of Technology. Two years later he moved to Harvard University, became a Professor of Political Philosophy, and remained there for about forty years. The final chapters of his life included his commendable achievements of not only completing [|The Law of Peoples], which contained his complete and intellectual positions on international justice, but also //Justice as Fairness: A Restatement// while suffering several strokes. Rawls’ life inevitably ended on November 24, 2002 in Lexington, Massachusetts. In addition to writing numerous philosophical works, Rawls won both the acclaimed Schock prize for Logic & Philosophy and the National Humanities Medal, the latter awarded by President Bill Clinton. His contributions were not only prodigious in the philosophical “department”; Rawls “helped a whole generation of learned Americans revive their faith in democracy itself.” ==== ====

====

__Views:__
Justice:

==== Rawls bases his idealistic views on justice on the simplistic ground of freedom and equality. Moreover, his view on freedom consists of __two moral powers:__ "a capacity for a __sense of [|justice]__ and for a __conception of the good__." ==== ==== **__ A sense of justice __** - Rawls believes that when you are dealing with a situation, you have to view the entire problem and include the public eye. It would only be fair that you consider and incorporate what/how an outside figure may feel or how a situation can impact them rather that just looking at the situation and deciding what would be a better outcome for __you__. ==== ==== **__ A conception of the good __** - when dealing with a situation, we should put aside what goals or pre-expected outcome we would like and think about what would be good for the sake of __everyone__. Moreover, the attachment to someone else through loyalties, associations, family members, etc. should not be a thought that impacts your decision because everybody should have an equal opportunity. ====

--In explanation, everyone should have the same basic rights.
==== Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions. First, they must be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they must be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society. ====

--In explanation, //[|Difference Principle],// social and economic inequalities should be set up to benefit the least well off.
==== // [|Equal Opportunity] // - offices and positions should be awarded based on merit, but everyone should have a reasonable opportunity to acquired the skills needed to win those offices and positions. ====

Desert:

==== Rawls looks at everyone’s situation and where they are in life (ie. Social class) and concluded that everyone does not //deserve// what they are born into physically, mentally, economically, etc. He also believes that no person deserves the character traits a human being is born with. For, example, if someone is born with anger problems; he feels that this particular individual does not //deserve// this trait. Even if it is a positive trait, caring, for example, he feels they do not //deserve// it. Rawls expresses that all of these “undeserved” things are __[|natural distribution]__ and simply natural facts. What makes these things just or unjust is how society or particular institutions choose to deal with these individual facts. ====

__ Possible Opposition: __
==== Some may argue that some people in society work hard for what they get and all of their hard work pays off in return (ex: a job). Therefore, people who follow this type of ethic may claim that they **do** deserve everything they have, and they deserve the character traits given to them to get to that position. ====

Entitlement: ====Rawls believes that every individual is entitled be treated fairly and equally by giving them something where there is a definite reason for assistance. Although this benefits the generally less well-off member’s of society (the majority), it does impede on the rich’s rights to their earnings.==== ====A common counter-argument against Rawls’ theories relevant to entitlement is that everyone should have an entitlement to what they legitimately earn and acquire. So, those people should be free from Rawls’ ideas of taking their wealth and distributing it out to the poorer members of society. However, there rights are infringed when they are stripped of what they are entitled to.====



The Role of Government: ====Rawls believed that individuals did not deserve what they were born with, or what they did not earn. In this, Rawls makes the contention that is the government’s duty to have relative omnipotence and complete jurisdiction for matters of societies’ individuals’ deservings. Rawls wanted and interventionist government that was involved in handling disparities of wealth and social class to augment life for the poorer members of society who did not deserve what they got. The government’s role was to improve life for those who needed help.====

 Taxes:

====Rawls originally argued for inheritance taxes, because otherwise he prophesized that an insurmountably large would be insidiously established between the unjustifiably rich and poor. Rawls believed that to level the playing field, the families where parents are rich should be subject to [|progressive taxation] so that an undeserved inheritance is removed, but opportunities are still equal to those of the poor, who would be taxed significantly less. It would be reducing the rich and slowly allowing the poor to ascend in wealth until both groups are at a fairly level competitive field with equal opportunities.==== ====However, Rawls said it would be unfair for the rich to leave their money for whoever they wanted, therefore saying that the government should be involved in doing so. Additionally, Rawls said that redistribution of wealth and equalizing the competition should not go as far as his ethics desire because it would hurt even the poor, who he was trying to assist.====

__Significance:__
 ====  In our opinion, John Rawls views are completely correct. In the type of society we live in, focusing on just yourself and making sure that everything you do or decide to benefits you will not get you a long way. In one of the three principles of justice, Rawls argues that everyone should have the same basic rights. We may look at some situations, and our first instinct may be that you would like an income you, a family member, etc. However, this is morally incorrect. This is what Rawls calls “the conception of good.” Social attachments should not have an impact on any moral decision. Another moral power that we completely agree with is “a sense of justice”, because when you are in certain situations it is only right to consider what your decisions or changes may do or may have an effect on others (negatively or positively). Therefore; we can do nothing with completely agree with this philosopher, because who would not appreciate an equal society with equal treatment for all? Of all of the other philosophers, the most discord would probably be struck with Robert Nozick. It is clear that Nozick would, if debating with Rawls, expostulate the majority of Rawls’ opinions and conclusions. On an ancillary note, Milton Friedman had differing views from Rawls on some small topics. Nozick, unlike Rawls, believes that taxation is outright theft. Nozick believed that all money is a form of labor. For example, your inherited money is technically of your parents or ancestors’ labor. To excessively tax them would be unrighteous and a form of theft. On the other hand, Rawls believed that taxes are necessary to balance society. Rawls viewed taxes with the utmost importance for creating socioeconomic equality among people. Nozick could simply care less. Nozick also believed that the government should not be a part of daily life. In fact, Nozick was an anarchist. To no surprise, Rawls once again had differing views from Nozick. Rawls believed that the government played a pivotal role in creating economic and social equality and stability. John Rawls brings up viewpoints that are pertinent to our everyday lives, which evokes interest simply because it relates to us as people. Basically, we care because it is about us. This could be labeled as human nature. Rawls’ viewpoints that he brings up are important because they put into question the society in which we live in. Pointing out problems with a lifestyle that we, for the most part, are accustomed to (and thereby comfortable with) brings us, in a sense, out of our comfort zones. In doing this, we truly question not only what is around us but lucidly see the problems questioned by Rawls. Moreover, our philosopher’s viewpoints serve to point out flaws in the society we live in. By doing this, Rawls elucidates the problems and does all possibly to spread these ideas. Additionally, these ideas have given a materialistic glory; his books and ideas have won him the prestigious Schock Prize for Logic & Philosophy and the National Humanities Medal. ==== 

__Works Cited:__
"Original Position." //Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy//. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2010. . "Rawls, John." //Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy//. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2010. . "Rawls' Mature Theory of Social Justice: A Introduction for Students." //WKU IT ASA//. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2010. []. "Friedrich Nietzsche." //Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy//. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2010. . "James Flynn’s Top 5 Liberals." Cambridge, n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2010. . "John Rawls' The Law of Peoples: A Way to Rethink Some Issues in Post-colonial Theory in a Global Context." //IUP English Department//. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2010. . "John Rawls." //Wikipedia,//. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2010. .