Preview

Rawls Trawls' Theory of Justice, Hayeks Theory of Freedom

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2166 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Rawls Trawls' Theory of Justice, Hayeks Theory of Freedom
Compare and contrast Rawls’ theory of justice with Hayek’s version of freedom. In doing so please outline and justify which theory provides a better explanation

Friedrich Hayek was a British philosopher who wrote from his experiences of World War one in which he served. It is known that based on Hayek’s experience in the war and his desire to help avoid the mistakes that had orchestrated to the war; he was led to this career in which he developed the theory of freedom. Hayek argues that there are many definitions for the term freedom; however he refers to this as “freedom without coercion.” Hayek also speaks to individual and personal freedom in which he argues that a man is either free or not free. Being free he says is acting on one’s own will and not the will of another and emphasises the idea that there are two types of freedom; freedom to and freedom from. When Hayek speaks to freedom, he makes mention of Political, Personal/Inner as well as Economic freedom. John Rawls on the other hand was an American philosopher who wrote from his experiences of World War two. Rawls developed the theory of Justice. Justice is a concept of moral relevance based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, equity or fairness. Rawls refers to “justice as fairness” and from the theory of justice, the liberty and difference principle was derived. Rawls argues that "Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as information is of preparations of thought." From the theory of justice the original position and the veil of ignorance were also developed. These concepts will be explained further.
The aim of this essay is to outline and formulate major distinctions between the two theories listed above by stating the similarities as well as the differences that tells them apart and evaluate both theories, subsequently justifying which of the two provides a better explanation. As was mentioned before, Hayek’s theory of freedom refers to freedom from coercion. The

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    von Hayek’s defense of the free market is sound, but, fortunately for me, an attack on the logic rather than the ethics of the argument. While von Hayek identifies Galbraith’s fallacy and defends the attack on liberty and the market, he ignores the core moral argument and misses an opportunity to dispatch of The Dependence Effect on its own grounds.…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls’ Fairness Approach is an appropriate ethical framework to use when assessing this dilemma. This approach questions if everyone involved is being treated fairly (is there favoritism and discrimination?). The Fairness Approach examines how fairly or unfairly the actions of an individual or group distribute benefits and burdens everyone else. With this approach, consistency of treatment among persons is key. The only insistence when treatment must differ is if there is a morally relevant difference between people (Andre, Meyer, Shanks, Velasquez, 1989). There are three different kinds of justice -- Distributive, Restorative, and Compensatory. Distributive justice focuses on the benefits and burdens evenly distributed amongst society’s…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The traditional view is that of the compatibilists which states that freedom is the ability to act, or not to act, according to the determinations of the will. It is so defined to make it compatible with the theory of determinism, which essentially states that all actions have a causal explanation due to the state of the world in the moment previous.…

    • 906 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The United States Pledge of Allegiance is an honorable and commendable mantra. It concludes with, “one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.” Justice in the former reference is inclusive for everyone, an entitlement, granted upon birth. John Rawls position of justice is that “everyone should be treated equally and as fair as possible”. Mr. Rawls position parallels the Egalitarian theory of equality and mutual respect. This isn’t necessarily the practice because contrary to the hope for multiple factors are factored in to the outcome.…

    • 230 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In John Locke’s time of influence, he made a strong impact on many people’s idea of life. He was a strong advocate for the idea that each human had a purpose and they are given many rights from their first breath. In the eyes of Locke, the Natural Rights Philosophy was that all living things should have laws pertaining to their own lives and these laws serve for the preservation of their existence and that no one should stand in the way of any human achieving these rights. In correspondence with him establishing these ideas, many people agreed with this theory and expanded upon it. The Declaration of Independence and the foundation of our Government had many strong connections with the ideas that Locke established in his Natural Rights Philosophy. With his views being exhibited to many, it was clear that he was very impactful to the Declaration of the Independence. Many topics stated in the Preamble were supportive and in favor of the viewpoints of Locke’s Natural Rights Philosophy.…

    • 480 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    (1) What does Rawls mean by "the original position . . . under the veil of ignorance" and how does this serve as the basis for his theory of justice? (2) What are his two principles of justice? Explain the two principles.
(3) Offer a brief critical evaluation of his theory of justice.…

    • 629 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Maximizing Welfare Essay

    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages

    People always sway the limitations of freedom for personal gain. “The idea that justice means respecting freedom and individual rights” has been tossed about in our courts and communities tirelessly. Part of the basis of the United States is freedom; the bill of rights lists ways in which the government must respect people’s most basic freedoms. Sandel talks about two different camps, the laissez-faire camp and the fairness camp, each arguing for freedoms but in their own way. The laissez-faire camp doesn’t believe in government or community policies, but in each person’s voluntary choices. However, the fairness camp believes “justice requires policies that remedy social and economic disadvantages” which in turn will give everyone a shot. An example of moral judgment and freedom is the first amendment in the Bill of Rights. Everyone is granted the freedom to talk about whatever they please, whether it upsets other or not. In certain situations although a right some things should not be said and knowing that difference takes moral judgment.…

    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He states that economic freedom is the most important freedom, that is to say, if you give up your economic freedom, you give up also the rest of your freedoms. However, without economic freedom, political freedom is useless, so it is essential to preserve it. The key issue is productive property, because this private property is what guarantees freedom. Under private ownership, there is no decision-making body to know what to do and make, so Hayek says that there must be a plan. Planning and competition need to be connected in order to maintain effective operation production, because there is a goal, which is known as the “general welfare” .…

    • 743 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Capitalism and Freedom, written by Milton Friedman, seems to focus significantly on the connections between the economics and politics, and the effect that those have in various aspects of society. This relationship was referred to throughout the book, and the topics Friedman discusses ranged between governmental control of money, to foreign policy and trade and the effect that has on our economy. Through the course of the book, Friedman constantly refers to his “classical liberal” view, which focuses on the freedoms and power of the individual in society. Friedman shows his support of this view during the book using the idea of a laissez-faire government. For Freidman, government involvement in issues regarding society should be minimized, and the government should only really use their power to assist society when things are not going well. Friedman believes that government should only be the most basic form of overseer of the nation. The thought of the free market driving the economy strongly prevails within the book. He claims that the government should only be there to reduce the inevitable rises and falls of the economy when it is free market based. This way, the changes in the market will be able to remain less drastic. Friedman refers to the capitalist system as an unstable form of economy, and that government should be more of a support structure, rather than the basis of the economic system. He strongly believes that too much governmental influence would restrict our rights and liberties. This belief was one of his main focuses through the entire book. Friedman states in the introduction “Our minds tell us, and history confirms, that the great threat to freedom is the concentration of power.” (Pg. 2)…

    • 2518 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hayek Document Analysis

    • 1432 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Throughout Hayek document he expresses that freedom in American is merely another work for power and wealth, compared to Lyndon B. Johnson looks at freedom as everyone is equal and that we all have the right of freedom. The difference between the two are that document 149 by Hayek states” freedom…

    • 1432 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order to understand Hayek’s view we first need to understand social justice, which in many cases is nearly impossible to understand. What you call social justice your neighbor may not; in fact, if you place a hundred people in a room you are likely to get nearly as many answers. This begs the question, how can we achieve something we cannot agreeably define, and how much force is necessary to achieve its success? The first problem with the term “Social Justice” is it means too many things for too many people, issues surrounding race, women’s rights, universal healthcare, a right to income, jobs, housing, food, on and on. And by “right” we must understand that in the context of social justice, this right comes from government, it must be provided for by government and government must rectify any wrongs.…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The first chapter begins by explaining the relevance of the economic stand points that people are unaware of. F.A. Hayek points out a key aspect that relates to society sharing a Totalitarianism view; which is simply one person or a government being the absolute power. However, all people really want is their freedom. Over time I believe that Hayek feels that the people are losing their freedom. Totalitarianism is different and the people did not fully understand what was going to happen. In all reality it was just a change not necessarily for the better.…

    • 1375 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Essay Question: Freedom and lack of Freedom existed side by side in English colonies. Using examples from Pennsylvania and elsewhere demonstrate how greater freedom for some colonists meant less freedom for others. 300 to 600 words…

    • 499 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The issue of distributive justice is relevant in our society due to current thoughts on economic inequality in politics. The political philosophers John Rawls and Robert Nozick have differing views when it comes to the topic of distributive justice. This analyze the positions of John Rawls and Robert Nozick, finding that Nozick’s view of distribution is preferable to Rawls’ difference principle because people deserve to keep what they earn and their earnings should not be taken away from them because that would be a violation of their personal liberties.…

    • 1823 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls Vs Nozick

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Both John Rawls and Robert Nozick have made major contributions to modern political philosophy. Rawls’ most successful philosophical work, “A Theory of Justice,” has helped construct both modern liberal and social democratic concepts of social justice. On the other hand, “Anarchy, State, and Utopia”, Nozick’s most successful philosophical work, constructs a form of libertarianism traditionally associated with John Locke and other philosophers prescribed to individual rights and freedoms. Evidently, both philosophers exhibit two highly distinct political philosophies. One major difference between the two philosophies is the legitimacy of governmental redistribution of wealth. As a result, Rawls and Nozick are at two opposite ends of the political…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays