[lit-ideas] Re: The Reluctant Water Boarder
- From: Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:52:59 -0700
Eric Yost wrote
Walter mentioned Rawls' theory of distributive
justice a while back. Isn't that essentially
"doing unfair things for (perceived) greater
social justice"?
then I wrote
Rawls says no such thing.
and Eric said
Probably I misconstrue. In his controversial
"difference principle," Rawls argued that the
"unequal" can be just. (See below.) For a mandarin
to presume to "arrange social and economic
inequalities" strikes me as unfair, in the same
way that Plato's Republic strikes me as unfair.
"An unequal distribution can be just" ... in
other words, a mandarin in charge of reallocating
resources chooses an unequal distribution to
achieve justice.
I think we don't disagree about anything more important than words.
(Take that, Grice and Austin!) I agree that it's presumptuous,
condescending, and futile for bureaucrats, technocrats, and philosopher
kings to decide how goods are distributed; but Rawls' veil of ignorance
is supposed to prevent rational deciders from raking in all the chips;
at least that's what I understand. No distribution of goods is imposed
from on high, as it is in the Republic (which gets worse every time
I read it).
I've gotten ahead of myself: Eric goes on to say
Again, this came from striving to understand the
maximin principle Walter mentioned on another
thread. It seemed patently unfair that Philosopher
Kings or Rawlsian technocrats should presume to
know what maximizes benefit. Hence Rawls seems to
argue that the unfair can be just.
Here we disagree about words. Rawls doesn't argue, as far as I know,
that 'the unfair can be just'—he argues that there are acceptable
inequalities. and that these are compatible with fairness, and indeed
that justice depends upon accepting them. Here I must stop, for my dim
memory of Rawls has now gone completely blank.
Rawls introduces the notions that are later refined and expanded in A
Theory of Justice in this article, which first appeared in the
Philosophical Review, in 1958. It's a shorter read.
http://www.hist-analytic.org/Rawlsfair.htm
Robert Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts: