For similar conclusions regarding socialist countries, see W. See Henry Phelps Brown, The Inequality of Pay (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), p. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), p. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. In a perfectly just society, there will be no rationale for preferential treatment. It tries to remove some of the consequences of existing injustices rather than to build a perfectly just society. Preferential treatment is an emergency device: it gives redress to victims of injustices committed in violation of the principles of desert and/or of basic needs, which have been discussed earlier in this book. This Chapter is concerned with a particular part of such ‘non-ideal theory’ regarding the distribution of social benefits it is, therefore, useful to discuss it before we turn to the question of a distribution of burdens in the next Chapter. It starts with the assumption that the world in which we live is essentially unjust. ‘Non-ideal theory’ avoids the need to resort to the Rawlsian ‘strict compliance’ condition. We need also, apart from the ‘ideal theory’, a conception of how we should react to already existing injustices. It is a useful utopia in that it provides us with a vision of the world to be sought, yet it is a utopia because it will never be attained fully. The part of the conception of justice sketched there belongs to what John Rawls calls ‘ideal theory’ it assumes that principles of justice “will be strictly complied with and followed by everyone”. The two previous chapters outline the principles of perfect justice: a society displaying them is a perfectly just society.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |