John Rawls, a 20th-century American philosopher, asked questions like how can we live in a just world when children starve to death while there are people with so much money they don’t know what to do with it? He lived from 1921 to 2002. He fought in WW2 and lived through two other wars. He did not approve of war as a way of resolution and justice-seeking. His time at war influenced his future writings a lot. He found justice in thinking and writing. In his book The Theory of Justice, he provided a never heard before perspective on fairness and justice. It was originally only meant to be read by fellow academics but it became very popular and many people read it. It became one of the most influential books of the 20th century. His core belief was that we need to think deeply about how we coexist as a society and think about the ways the state controls our lives.
“All is fair in love and war”
This saying is one that Rawls would not agree with. He created a thought experiment called the “Original Position”. It was based on the idea that humans are innately biased and selfish. If a person is asked to restructure our systems to create a better society they will focus on their experiences to change it without considering others. For example, a wealthy person often times will not consider less fortunate people when thinking about the issues in the world. Rawls says that they have to have an “Original Position”. They cannot know what position they will hold in this new society in order to organize it fairly.
DQs
What are the biggest injustices you find in the world around you?
Is it possible to coexist?
Do you think there is a way to be unbiased when assessing the state of our society?
Do politicians serve using the “veil of ignorance?”
More readings:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/
https://iep.utm.edu/rawls/
Gracie Fogo (H03)
ReplyDeletehttps://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BI0QVwH8u5TmvyejqZBpmjrQ6j6io8Ix8hhtszNDTX4/edit?usp=sharing
Do you think there is a way to be unbiased when assessing the state of our society?
ReplyDeleteNo. As a constituent member of the society you help shape the culture, social reproduction, and have experiences that bias/prejudice you.
H3
ReplyDeleteIs it possible to coexist?
I think it is possible to coexist. People can respect other's beliefs while having their own.
Do you think there is a way to be unbiased when assessing society?
I do not think it is possible. A person's beliefs or ideas will influence what they perceive around them.
H01
DeleteI agree to a certain extent we need to be accepting of others beliefs. But I also think there are plenty of circumstances where certain beliefs are abhorrent enough to not tolerate, and to not just not tolerate but also to call out. Because there is a very strong power ideas can have that take them beyond just being the way that people think. Thought influences and dictates action, in other words actions are ideas brought to the material world. So in that sense if we tolerate every idea as equal, we'd be treating all actions that come from that as equal.
I agree. We should not tolerate ideas that will potentilly harm others. Ideas can be powerful when turned into actions.
DeleteH01
ReplyDeleteDo politicians serve using the “veil of ignorance?”
Politician let people believe what they want to believe. They use platforms that they know will serve the most amount of people.