Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 08: "WHATS A FAIR START?"
Harvard University・2 minutes read
Funding for distributive justice should prioritize equal basic liberties and benefits for the least well-off, as proposed by Rawls, rather than merit-based systems. Rawls's theory emphasizes the importance of societal structures in balancing income inequalities and legitimate entitlements over moral desert in distributive justice.
Insights
- John Rawls proposes the difference principle as a solution to address income inequalities, advocating for a system where only inequalities that benefit the least well-off are just, countering merit-based arguments by emphasizing the moral arbitrariness of rewarding natural talents and abilities.
- Rawls challenges the concept of meritocracy by highlighting the impact of arbitrary factors like birth order on success and opportunities, advocating for distributive justice rooted in satisfying legitimate expectations based on societal structures rather than solely on moral desert, aiming to balance income differentials and ensure fair opportunities for all individuals.
Get key ideas from YouTube videos. It’s free
Recent questions
What is distributive justice?
Fair distribution of income, wealth, power, opportunities based on principles.
Who is John Rawls?
Philosopher advocating for distributive justice principles.
What is the difference principle?
Principle allowing only inequalities benefiting the least well-off.
What are challenges to Rawls's principles?
Arguments for merit-based systems and rewarding effort.
How does Rawls address income distribution fairness?
By proposing the difference principle and taxing the wealthy.
Related videos
Harvard University
Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 09: "ARGUING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION"
Phil Uploads
Lewis Video Lecture FULL
Hoover Institution
Thomas Sowell on the Origins of Economic Disparities
Harvard University
Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 02: "PUTTING A PRICE TAG ON LIFE"
Free To Choose Network
Milton Friedman Schools Young Idealist - 2 (Stanford)
Summary
00:00
"Rawls' Difference Principle: Justice for All"
- Funding for the program is provided by additional funding.
- Today's focus is on distributive justice, particularly how income, wealth, power, and opportunities should be distributed based on principles.
- John Rawls offers a detailed answer to this question, emphasizing the importance of a hypothetical contract behind the veil of ignorance.
- Rawls argues against utilitarianism, advocating for equal basic liberties as the first principle chosen behind the veil of ignorance.
- The second principle involves social and economic inequalities, with Rawls proposing the difference principle, allowing only inequalities that benefit the least well-off.
- Rawls uses examples like Michael Jordan and Bill Gates to illustrate how only inequalities that benefit everyone, especially the least well-off, are just.
- Challenges to Rawls's principles are discussed, with some arguing for a merit-based system where rewards are based on effort.
- Rawls counters this by emphasizing the moral arbitrariness of rewarding natural talents and abilities in a meritocratic system.
- Rawls proposes going beyond meritocracy to a system where those with talents benefit, but only if it improves the situation of the least well-off.
- The difference principle is presented as a solution to address moral arbitrariness in the distribution of income and wealth, ensuring benefits for all, especially the disadvantaged.
21:58
"Rawls challenges income fairness based on birth"
- Michael Jordan's income of 31 million dollars is attributed to his challenging life journey to success, highlighting societal perceptions of success and effort.
- Rawls questions the fairness of income distribution based on arbitrary factors like birth order, challenging the meritocratic concept of rewarding effort.
- Birth order is suggested to significantly influence work ethic and striving, impacting one's success and opportunities in life.
- Rawls presents three theories of distributive justice: libertarian, fair equality of opportunity, and the difference principle, advocating for a more egalitarian approach.
- The difference principle aims to balance income differentials by taxing the wealthy to benefit the least well-off in society.
- Rawls addresses objections to his theory, including concerns about incentives, moral desert, and self-ownership, emphasizing the importance of legitimate entitlements over moral desert in distributive justice.
- Effort is questioned as the sole basis for deserving income, with Rawls highlighting the role of natural talents and contributions in determining one's success.
- Rawls distinguishes between moral desert and entitlements, likening distributive justice to a game of skill where legitimate expectations are met, rather than focusing on moral desert.
- The concept of distributive justice is clarified as being rooted in satisfying legitimate expectations based on social institutions, rather than solely on moral desert.
- Rawls's theory of distributive justice aims to balance income inequalities by considering societal structures and ensuring fair opportunities for all individuals.
47:09
Rawls questions societal entitlements and moral desert.
- Rawls distinguishes between moral desert and entitlements in the principles of justice that govern societal structure, highlighting the lack of direct correlation between individual worth and distributive shares.
- The moral issue at hand involves the arbitrariness of societal values and the impact of living in a society that prizes certain talents, emphasizing the role of luck and societal contingencies in determining success.
- Rawls challenges the notion of deserving a society that values specific qualities, questioning the moral status of entitlements to benefits based on individual efforts and talents, particularly in relation to income, wealth, opportunities, and honors.
