A CRITIC OF JUSTICE:  ABOUT JOHN RAWLS’S APPROACH OF JUSTICE

Emine Cengiz

Article Details

A CRITIC OF JUSTICE: ABOUT JOHN RAWLS’S APPROACH OF JUSTICE

Authors:

Emine Cengiz

Publisher:

Dokuz Eylul University

Journal:

Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Vol.25 Issue 2, pp.556-579

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

6/2023

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001290619

pISSN:

1308-0911

Keywords:

Abstract:

 What is justice? It is one of the oldest, complex and difficult questions that humanity has tried to answer. Until today, in the history of philosophy, the nature of justice has been tried to be explained in various ways. John Rawls, the most prominent and important destination in political philosophy, also described justice as the first virtue of social institutions in his work A Theory of Justice. In the context of social justice, he presented his theory, which is called justice as fairness. For Rawls, The basic structure, consisting of political and social institutions, is in a decisive position on peoples lives and possibilities. In that case, the formation of a just society will be possible by arranging this structure within the framework of a fair procedure. Undoubtedly, there will be certain rules in the construction process. From this point of view, Rawls explains the selection process of the principles of justice by making use of contract theory and Kants views. Unlike other members of the tradition, the contract is not associated with the transition to society, but with the negotiation and selection of the principles of justice. He envisions a hypothetical, abstract, original situation where there is no danger in terms of rights and freedoms. The parties who will choose the principles of justice in the original situation are under the veil of ignorance. With the veil, they are deprived of information about themselves and others, such as their gender, social status, religious beliefs, conceptions of good, natural abilities, etc. In this way, impartiality and equality will be ensured, and no one will be able to choose what is advantageous for herself and favor anyone. Parties that are equal, free, rational,capacity for a sense of justice and a conception of good will eventually reach the two principles of justice. According to these principles, first of all, in a just society, all citizens must have equal basic liberties. People with similar skills, regardless of race, ethnicity or gender etc., must have equal opportunities in the distribution of duties and positions. In addition, the gains from natural talents, which are random, will be acceptable only if they benefit the disadvantaged. In this study, the conditions for the formation of a just society, the limitations of the veil of ignorance, the problems created by the idea of the person and the difference principle will be discussed by expressing the basis of Rawlss understanding in the context of rights and freedoms.

 What is justice? It is one of the oldest, complex and difficult questions that humanity has tried to answer. Until today, in the history of philosophy, the nature of justice has been tried to be explained in various ways. John Rawls, the most prominent and important destination in political philosophy, also described justice as the first virtue of social institutions in his work A Theory of Justice. In the context of social justice, he presented his theory, which is called justice as fairness. For Rawls, The basic structure, consisting of political and social institutions, is in a decisive position on peoples lives and possibilities. In that case, the formation of a just society will be possible by arranging this structure within the framework of a fair procedure. Undoubtedly, there will be certain rules in the construction process. From this point of view, Rawls explains the selection process of the principles of justice by making use of contract theory and Kants views. Unlike other members of the tradition, the contract is not associated with the transition to society, but with the negotiation and selection of the principles of justice. He envisions a hypothetical, abstract, original situation where there is no danger in terms of rights and freedoms. The parties who will choose the principles of justice in the original situation are under the veil of ignorance. With the veil, they are deprived of information about themselves and others, such as their gender, social status, religious beliefs, conceptions of good, natural abilities, etc. In this way, impartiality and equality will be ensured, and no one will be able to choose what is advantageous for herself and favor anyone. Parties that are equal, free, rational,capacity for a sense of justice and a conception of good will eventually reach the two principles of justice. According to these principles, first of all, in a just society, all citizens must have equal basic liberties. People with similar skills, regardless of race, ethnicity or gender etc., must have equal opportunities in the distribution of duties and positions. In addition, the gains from natural talents, which are random, will be acceptable only if they benefit the disadvantaged. In this study, the conditions for the formation of a just society, the limitations of the veil of ignorance, the problems created by the idea of the person and the difference principle will be discussed by expressing the basis of Rawlss understanding in the context of rights and freedoms.

 What is justice? It is one of the oldest, complex and difficult questions that humanity has tried to answer. Until today, in the history of philosophy, the nature of justice has been tried to be explained in various ways. John Rawls, the most prominent and important destination in political philosophy, also described justice as the first virtue of social institutions in his work A Theory of Justice. In the context of social justice, he presented his theory, which is called justice as fairness. For Rawls, The basic structure, consisting of political and social institutions, is in a decisive position on peoples lives and possibilities. In that case, the formation of a just society will be possible by arranging this structure within the framework of a fair procedure. Undoubtedly, there will be certain rules in the construction process. From this point of view, Rawls explains the selection process of the principles of justice by making use of contract theory and Kants views. Unlike other members of the tradition, the contract is not associated with the transition to society, but with the negotiation and selection of the principles of justice. He envisions a hypothetical, abstract, original situation where there is no danger in terms of rights and freedoms. The parties who will choose the principles of justice in the original situation are under the veil of ignorance. With the veil, they are deprived of information about themselves and others, such as their gender, social status, religious beliefs, conceptions of good, natural abilities, etc. In this way, impartiality and equality will be ensured, and no one will be able to choose what is advantageous for herself and favor anyone. Parties that are equal, free, rational,capacity for a sense of justice and a conception of good will eventually reach the two principles of justice. According to these principles, first of all, in a just society, all citizens must have equal basic liberties. People with similar skills, regardless of race, ethnicity or gender etc., must have equal opportunities in the distribution of duties and positions. In addition, the gains from natural talents, which are random, will be acceptable only if they benefit the disadvantaged. In this study, the conditions for the formation of a just society, the limitations of the veil of ignorance, the problems created by the idea of the person and the difference principle will be discussed by expressing the basis of Rawlss understanding in the context of rights and freedoms.

 Adalet nedir? insanlığın cevaplamaya çalıştığı en eski, karmaşık ve zor sorulardan biridir. Bugüne kadar felsefe tarihinde çeşitli şekillerde adaletin neliği açıklanmaya çalışılmıştır. Siyaset felsefesinin en seçkin ve önemli uğrak noktası olan John Rawls da Bir Adalet Teorisi adlı eserinde adaleti, sosyal kurumların birinci erdemi olarak tanımlamıştır. Toplumsal adalet bağlamında konuyu ele alarak hakkaniyet olarak adalet şeklinde adlandırılan teorisini ortaya koymuştur. Rawls için siyasi ve sosyal kurumlardan oluşan temel yapı; insanların yaşamları, olanakları üzerinde belirleyici konumundadır. O halde adil toplumun teşekkül edebilmesi bu yapının adil bir usul çerçevesinde düzenlenmesiyle söz konusu olacaktır. Şüphesiz inşa sürecinde belirli kuralların olması gerekecektir. Buradan hareketle Rawls, adalet ilkelerinin seçim sürecini sözleşme teorisinden ve Kantın görüşlerinden faydalanarak açıklar. Geleneğin diğer üyelerinden farklı olarak sözleşme, toplum haline geçiş ile değil, adalet ilkelerinin müzakere edilmesi, seçilmesi ile ilişkilidir. Hipotetik, soyut, hak ve özgürlük bakımından tehlikenin olmadığı bir orijinal durumu tasavvur eder. Orijinal durumdaki adalet ilkelerini seçecek olan taraflar, bilgisizlik peçesi altındadır. Peçe ile hem kendileri hem de başkaları hakkında cinsiyetleri, toplumsal statüleri, dinsel inançları, iyi anlayışları, doğal yetenekleri vb. bilgilerden yoksun kalmaktadırlar. Bu şekilde tarafsızlık ve eşitlik sağlanmış olacak, kimse kendi için avantajlı olanı seçip, kimseyi kayıramayacaktır. Eşit, özgür, rasyonel, adalet duygusu ve iyi anlayışı oluşturma kapasitesi gibi özelliklere sahip olan taraflar sonunda adaletin iki ilkesine ulaşacaklardır. Bu ilkelere göre öncelikle adil bir toplumda bütün vatandaşlar eşit temel özgürlüklere; benzer yetenektekilerin, ırkına, etnik kökenine, cinsiyetine vb. bakılmaksızın, görev ve mevkilerin dağıtımında eşit fırsatlara sahip olması gerekir. Ayrıca kaderin rastlantısallığı sonucu olan doğal yeteneklerden elde edilen kazançlar ancak ve ancak dezavantajlılara yarar sağladığında kabul edilebilir olacaktır. Bu çalışmada da Rawlsın anlayışının dayanakları ifade edilerek adil toplumun meydana gelme şartları, bilgisizlik peçesinin sınırlandırmaları, ortaya koyulan kişi idesinin, fark ilkesinin yarattığı sorunlar hak ve özgürlükler bağlamında tartışmaya açılacaktır.

Article Details

A CRITIC OF JUSTICE: ABOUT JOHN RAWLS’S APPROACH OF JUSTICE

Authors:

Emine Cengiz

Publisher:

Dokuz Eylul University

Journal:

Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Vol.25 Issue 2, pp.556-579

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

6/2023

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001290619

pISSN:

1308-0911

Rawls

Justice as Fairess

The Principles of Justice

Veil of Ignorance

InequalitiesRawls

Hakkaniyet Olarak Adalet

Adalet ilkeleri

Bilgisizlik peçesi

Eşitsizlikler

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Emine Cengiz

Publisher: Dokuz Eylul University

Journal: Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Vol.25 Issue 2, pp.556-579

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 6/2023

Document Language: Turkish

Document ID (Org No.): 2001290619

pISSN: 1308-0911

Issues

Authors:

Emine Cengiz

Publisher:

Dokuz Eylul University

Journal:

Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Vol.25 Issue 2, pp.556-579

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

6/2023

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001290619

pISSN:

1308-0911