Background knowledge to deeply understand ‘A Theory of Justice’ by John Rawls
Social Contract Theory
A foundational element for understanding Rawls is the concept of social contract theory, which posits that individuals’ moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. Prominent thinkers in this tradition, whose work Rawls engages with, include Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
Hobbes, in his seminal work *Leviathan*, argued that the natural state of humanity is a “war of all against all,” where life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” To escape this state, individuals agree to a social contract where they cede their natural rights to an absolute sovereign in exchange for security and order. Locke, in his *Two Treatises of Government*, offered a more optimistic view, arguing that individuals possess natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and that the social contract is formed to protect these rights. Rousseau, in *The Social Contract*, emphasized the concept of the “general will,” which represents the collective interest of the community and serves as the basis for legitimate authority.
Rawls draws inspiration from these thinkers but departs from them in crucial ways. He rejects Hobbes’s authoritarian vision and embraces a more liberal framework akin to Locke’s. However, Rawls goes beyond Locke by arguing that the social contract should not merely protect existing inequalities but should also aim to create a more just and equitable society. He also builds upon Rousseau’s notion of the general will by developing the concept of the “original position,” a hypothetical situation where individuals choose principles of justice from behind a “veil of ignorance.”
Utilitarianism
Another important philosophical framework that Rawls addresses is utilitarianism. This ethical theory, championed by thinkers such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, holds that the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or well-being. In other words, the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its consequences.
Rawls criticizes utilitarianism for potentially sacrificing the rights and interests of individuals for the sake of the greater good. He argues that a just society should prioritize basic individual liberties and ensure that the benefits and burdens of social cooperation are distributed fairly, even if this does not necessarily maximize overall happiness. Rawls’s theory, known as “justice as fairness,” offers an alternative to utilitarianism by grounding principles of justice in a hypothetical social contract that prioritizes individual rights and equal opportunities.
Intuitionism
Intuitionism, a prevalent ethical theory in the early 20th century, also plays a significant role in shaping Rawls’s thought. Intuitionists, such as W.D. Ross, argue that moral principles are self-evident and known through intuition, rather than being derived from reason or experience. They maintain that we have a direct, intuitive grasp of fundamental moral truths, such as the duty to keep promises or the wrongness of causing harm.
Rawls acknowledges the appeal of intuitionism but criticizes its reliance on subjective intuitions, which can vary significantly across individuals and cultures. He argues that a more robust and objective foundation for morality is needed, one that can provide a shared basis for resolving moral disagreements and establishing a just society. Rawls’s theory aims to provide such a foundation by grounding principles of justice in a hypothetical social contract that is based on rational choice and shared values, rather than on individual intuitions.
Political Philosophy of the 20th Century
Rawls’s work was also informed by the broader landscape of 20th-century political philosophy. This period saw intense debates about the nature of justice, the role of the state, and the relationship between individual rights and social obligations. Thinkers such as Isaiah Berlin, Hannah Arendt, and John Dewey, each in their own way, grappled with the challenges posed by totalitarianism, war, and social inequality.
Berlin, in his influential essay “Two Concepts of Liberty,” distinguished between negative liberty, which is freedom from interference by others, and positive liberty, which is the capacity to act autonomously and pursue one’s own goals. Arendt, in her work *The Origins of Totalitarianism*, analyzed the rise of totalitarian regimes and emphasized the importance of civic engagement and public participation in a free society. Dewey, in his pragmatic philosophy, stressed the importance of democratic deliberation and social experimentation in achieving a more just and equitable society.
Rawls’s *A Theory of Justice* can be seen as a response to these broader intellectual currents. He attempts to provide a philosophical framework for a just and stable liberal democracy that protects individual rights, promotes social cooperation, and addresses the challenges of inequality. His work draws upon and engages with the ideas of his predecessors and contemporaries, while also offering a unique and influential perspective on the nature of justice and the foundations of a well-ordered society.
Economics and Social Science
While primarily a work of political philosophy, *A Theory of Justice* also draws upon insights from economics and social science. Rawls was particularly influenced by the work of economists such as Kenneth Arrow and Amartya Sen, who explored issues of social choice, welfare economics, and the measurement of inequality.
Arrow’s “impossibility theorem” demonstrated the inherent difficulties in aggregating individual preferences into a coherent social choice, highlighting the challenges of democratic decision-making. Sen’s work on capabilities and human development emphasized the importance of not just focusing on material wealth but also on individuals’ abilities to function and live fulfilling lives.
Rawls incorporates these economic and social scientific insights into his theory by recognizing the complexities of social choice and the multidimensional nature of human well-being. He acknowledges that there is no single, universally agreed-upon metric for measuring social welfare and that a just society must consider a range of factors, including individual rights, opportunities, and resources. His “difference principle,” which allows for inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society, reflects this concern for social welfare and the importance of mitigating inequalities.
Browse A Theory of Justice paperback on Amazon
Reading while your motivation is high leads to better comprehension.