What is Rawls’s theory of justice?
In *A Theory of Justice* (1971), Harvard philosopher John Rawls asked what principles should govern the "basic structure" of society: its constitution, economy and property system. His answer, justice as fairness, says that principles chosen under fair conditions are just.
- Author
- John Rawls (A Theory of Justice, 1971)
- Core idea
- Just principles are those chosen behind a veil of ignorance
- Two principles
- Equal basic liberties; fair equality of opportunity and the difference principle
- Main critics
- Robert Nozick (libertarian), Michael Sandel (communitarian)
The original position and the veil of ignorance
Rawls invites us to imagine people choosing society’s rules without knowing their sex, race, wealth, talents or conception of the good life. This hypothetical choice situation is the original position, and the device that hides personal facts is the veil of ignorance.
Think of the rule for sharing a cake: whoever cuts it picks last. Behind the veil, you might end up as the least advantaged person, so you choose rules you could accept from that position.
The two principles of justice
| Principle | Content | Example |
|---|---|---|
| First: equal basic liberties | Everyone has an equal right to basic liberties such as conscience, speech and political participation | Free speech cannot be traded away for majority gains |
| Second (a): fair equality of opportunity | Offices and positions must be open to all under fair conditions | Not just non-discrimination, but real access to education |
| Second (b): difference principle | Social and economic inequalities are allowed only if they benefit the least advantaged most | Progressive taxes funding support for low-income families |
The principles are lexically ordered: equal liberty comes first, and fair equality of opportunity comes before the difference principle.
Maximin and the critique of utilitarianism
Rawls argued that under deep uncertainty, rational people would follow a maximin rule: choose the option whose worst outcome is best. That leads to the difference principle rather than maximizing average welfare, as utilitarianism would. Utilitarianism, he wrote, "does not take seriously the distinction between persons."
Cash Note
사회초년생 적금 얼마? 월급별 비율 예시와 청년미래적금 2026
24 readers so far
Make Korean friends & friends from around the world learning Korean
Chat easily with people from many countries who love Korea.
Beauty UP
대학생 가성비 기초 루틴 — 꼭 필요한 3단계만 남기기
297 readers so far
Psych UP
카톡 온도차 테스트｜답장은 차가운데 마음은 뜨거울 수도
6 people have taken it so far
Critics: Nozick and Sandel
- Robert Nozick (1974) argued that redistributing justly acquired holdings violates individual rights (his entitlement theory and libertarianism).
- Michael Sandel (1982) argued that the "unencumbered self" behind the veil ignores how communities and traditions shape who we are (communitarianism). His Harvard course "Justice" later made these debates widely known.
Rawls in law and policy
- Affirmative action: debates over race-conscious admissions, including the 2023 Supreme Court decision in *Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard*, often invoke fair equality of opportunity. See affirmative action.
- Taxes and welfare: progressive income taxation and programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit are often defended in difference-principle terms.
- Universal vs targeted programs: see universalism and selectivism.
Compare other allocation principles in distributive justice.
Frequently asked questions
- What is the veil of ignorance?
- A thought experiment in which people choose society’s rules without knowing their own sex, wealth, talents or values, so they cannot tilt the rules in their own favor.
- What is the difference principle?
- Social and economic inequalities are justified only if they work to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society.
- How does Rawls differ from utilitarianism?
- Utilitarianism maximizes total or average welfare; Rawls gives priority to basic liberties and to improving the position of the worst off.
References
- Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (E. Kelly, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
- Sandel, M. J. (1982). Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Wenar, L. (2008, rev. 2025). John Rawls. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. plato.stanford.edu