Principles of Justice vs. Utlitarianism
Justice is a social concept that is used as an assessment tool in various social institutions such as government, courts, economic systems and education. John Rawls proposed two principles of justice that will help govern in the creation of social and political practices that are fair to all (p. 52):
• Rawls’ first principle of justice states that “each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others (p. 53).”
• The second principle: “social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a) reasonably expected to be everyone’s advantage, and b) attached to positions and offices open to all”. (Rawl, p. 53)
He proposed these principles as an alternative framework to be used as guiding principles in a society. He provided criticisms on utilitarianism and has also raised two layers of arguments against it.
1. …show more content…
He argues that the utilitarianism way of following the rule of maximized expected utility is problematic as one cannot put value on the outcomes presented. He argues that during uncertain times of decision-making, parties are boxed in with two choices: maximize expected utility or maximin principle. The rules of maximizing expected utility, the parties are all required to list possible outcomes from different scenarios and note the value of the outcomes and choose the one with the best value (p. 283). The rule of maximin is simple: parties are to choose the best worst result. They are to assess the worst outcomes of the options and choose the one whose worst outcome is better than the other options (p.
Justice is a social concept that is used as an assessment tool in various social institutions such as government, courts, economic systems and education. John Rawls proposed two principles of justice that will help govern in the creation of social and political practices that are fair to all (p. 52):
• Rawls’ first principle of justice states that “each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others (p. 53).”
• The second principle: “social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a) reasonably expected to be everyone’s advantage, and b) attached to positions and offices open to all”. (Rawl, p. 53)
He proposed these principles as an alternative framework to be used as guiding principles in a society. He provided criticisms on utilitarianism and has also raised two layers of arguments against it.
1. …show more content…
He argues that the utilitarianism way of following the rule of maximized expected utility is problematic as one cannot put value on the outcomes presented. He argues that during uncertain times of decision-making, parties are boxed in with two choices: maximize expected utility or maximin principle. The rules of maximizing expected utility, the parties are all required to list possible outcomes from different scenarios and note the value of the outcomes and choose the one with the best value (p. 283). The rule of maximin is simple: parties are to choose the best worst result. They are to assess the worst outcomes of the options and choose the one whose worst outcome is better than the other options (p.