For many years the theory of justice has dominated the study of political philosophy. Mainly it is concerned with how government authority should govern the people in the society with fairness and justice. Social and political theory is concerned with how countries should be governed. It mainly focuses on how leaders in the society distribute the available resources and rights of the people to use them. For this to be possible the government should come up with goals that will define their course further they also need to understand justice, freedom and self-sufficiency in order to ensure equal distribution of good, (Rawls, J.1999).
This paper aims to discuss the difference principle, original principle their strength and weaknesses.
Original position
The original position theory emphasizes on how societies should be controlled that is each individual representative in the society work together to decide on the way forward of governing the society. Such that each rational agent is concerned with the interest of the people they represent and they should not know the background or the veil of ignorance of the person represented so that they do not prejudice them on the basis of race or gender, (Audard, C., and John R 2007).
The veil of ignorance presumes that the representative is logical and considers the concept of right inform of prioritizing irreconcilable alleges, application of justice to all irrespective of social status or race and should be recognized by the public. In addition those who are logic will collectively use this principle without knowledge of their own individual situation leading to the wrong choice of the best justice system. The application of the veil of justice should consider unevenness in genetic composition in human being and not environmental factors around them, (Levine, A. 2002).
Further the governments in the original position do not have the alleged ideas on justice instead they should be open-minded and reasonable which are important attributes in the sustenance of justice and fairness in the society. It calls for representative not having idealistic prejudice and this ensures fairness to all. The representatives should be aware of the two principles:
Principle of equal liberty that entails no individual should be oppressed on the basis of race, gender or class. Hence all the members in the society have the right to pursue their goals. Though this principle has weakness and strength.
Strengths
It advocates for equal rights to all in the society both the social and economic inequalities in the society should benefit the disadvantaged in the society. Furthermore, people’s representatives should ensure equal opportunities for their clients.
Theses principle also ensures efficiency in justice and welfare of the client is put into consideration. For instance assists their clients irrespective of their racial or ethnic background, (Barry B. 1973).
Weakness
The original principle does not prove moral principles since it does not believe in utility but philosophers like J.S.Mill have tried to come up with evidence about original position but it is not convincing but Rawl a true advocator of original positions believes that moral values should be the evidence of justice in the society.
Priority is considered from the top to bottom where by those are senior are served.For example, inequality of opportunities must enhance the opportunities for the lesser or disadvantaged people.
The principle is collectively used by many individuals with consideration to the environmental factors affecting their situations and not their genetic composition for instance mental disability is as a result of genetic and not the surrounding in which people live in,(Barry B. 1973).
The Difference Principle
This principle allows for the unequal distribution of goods to benefit the poor or the vulnerable members of the society. Every society member has equal rights over the society’s goods. The goods are the satisfying rational desires of the people in the society; they include liberty, income, opportunity, wealth and self-respects. Whereas the right is the fairness rendered to all, (Van P.1988).
Every members of the society has rights to unequal distribution goods and they should only be allowed to those who are worst off in the society. This principle also aims at reducing risks especially for the vulnerable group of people in the society. However for justice to prevail there is no need of equality in the society but justification to ensure justified incentives, (Daniels, N. 1989).
Difference principle ensures there is general conception, social contrast, Utilitarianism and Intuitionism. General conceptions ensure that equal distribution of basic goods to worst off in the society. Social contrast implies that societies need to agree on set out principle in order to live together in harmony. Utilitarianism calls for collective reduction of basic goods/rights to ensure equality to the majority. Intuitionism recognizes set of principle such liberty, justice and wealth which are donated but with no consideration to priority, (Waldron, J.1993).
Everyone especially the rich should sacrifice certain goods to assist the disadvantaged. Hence inequality is essential to for the disadvantaged in the society to improve their social status.
Reference
Rawls, J., (1999) A Theory of Justice (revised edition) Part One.
Audard, C., and John R (2007) London: Acumen.
Barry B., (1973) the Liberal Theory of Justice Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Daniels, N. (1989) Reading Rawls, Standford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Levine, A. (2002) Engaging in Political Philosophy Oxford: Blackwell.
Van P.(1988), ‘Difference Principles’, in Freeman (ed), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls.
Waldron, J., (1993)’John Rawls and the Social Minimum’, in Liberal Rights (Cambridge University Press.