13 - Justice and Distribution of Property II Flashcards
What is the hypothetical social contract?
- Initial hypothetical choice situation
- The Original Position (OP), with its Veil of Ignorance, models equality of concern
- Impartiality: “Justice as fairness” (equality, treating people the same)
What do people in the original position know?
- They are in circumstances of justice
- Are moderately self-interested and have conflicting goals
- Moderate scarcity: between scarcity and abundance
What is the thin theory of the good?
Want primary goods: liberties, opportunities, income and wealth, and the social basis of self-respect
What are the constraints on choosing?
1) Physical constraints - things that just cannot be made available
2) Logical constraints - things that defy logic and common sense
3) Formal constraints
a) Publicity - media makes us aware of the implications to some of our actions
b) Finality - you must follow the rules
What would people in the original position choose
Maximax? No
-Build a rule based off of maximizing opportunities - everyone should make the most money possible, etc.
Utility maximization? No
-Try to maximize happiness but won’t actually achieve this
Maximin? Yes
-Maximize the minimum - focus on the worst-off
What principles would be chosen by POP?
-Principle of greatest equal liberties
-Principle of fair equality and opportunity = everyone has an equal chance through life
-Difference principle
= if you are in violation of either of the first two it must be to the benefit of the least advantaged
-Lexical priority rules
= need to ensure that the first level is not violated, if we can then we do that before the difference principle
Why choose greatest equal liberties?
- Veil of ignorance makes it irrational to discriminate against anyone
- Maximize your share of primary goods
- The more basic freedoms the better
Why choose the difference principle?
- Maximin is the rational choice
- Finality and risk aversion
- Objection: ‘Maximization with a floor’ seems more desirable than the difference principle
What is the intuitive equality of opportunity argument?
- Prevailing view: equal opportunity
- Problem: choices and circumstances
- Natural inequalities are as morally arbitrary as social inequalities
- Allow inequalities only when they benefit the least advantaged
In a nutshell, what is Rawls arguing?
- Morally arbitrary differences - social and natural - should benefit the socially and naturally unlucky
- Injustice is inequality that doesn’t benefit everyone
- Legitimate inequalities must benefit the worst-off group
Nozick’s entitlement theory
- Distribution need not fit a pattern
- Patterns: Need, ability, desert
- Nozick’s theory is historical and unpatterned
The Wilt Chamberlain argument
- The first distribution is just
- All steps from distribution one to distribution two are voluntary
- Therefore, distribution two is just (even though it’s unequal)
- Liberty upsets patterns
What is Nozick’s objection to Rawls?
- Difference principle = patterned principle
- Free exchanges = new distribution
- Difference principle will require interference in people’s lives, this is unjust
Nozick vs. Rawls on taxation
-Rawls: Taxes on wealth need not be invasive
-Nozick: Taxation is on par with forced labour
Devalues a worker’s labour because the government takes it
-Rawls: Redistribution can increase the freedom of the poor
How do we assess Nozick?
- Correct: Emphasizing the value of making our own decisions and choices
- But: Fails to deal fairly with unequal circumstances
- So: Lack absolute property rights because such rights prevent us from compensating undeserved inequalities
