A Theory of Justice

So the first claim is that justice is the first virtue of social institutions.

This is a famous statement from the philosopher John Rawls at the very beginning of A Theory of Justice.

And what this means roughly is that when evaluating or reforming social institutions, we should regard justice as having a kind of priority over other considerations.

Say, it's more important that institutions be just than they be efficient or promote overall happiness or some other good thing.

It's an admirable ambition and not much help.

Where Hardin ultimately lands is, in substance, John Rawls's A Theory of Justice.

Rawls argued that the distribution of natural talents, intelligence, temperament, even the capacity for self-control, is morally arbitrary.

A natural lottery, no one earns any more than they earn their parents' bank balance.

book.

It was one that I used as inspiration, The Theory of Justice by John Rawls.

It's a book that he kind of, I mean, I assume but he talks about how this thing called the veil of ignorance.

And so the most fair way to create a just society is to create a hypothetical situation in which you have no idea what position you will take within that society.

Yeah, so the reason why Project Justice's prospectus has this elimination of standpoint and perspective and this idea that human emotions and experiences are noise comes almost directly from one of the towering figures of philosophy of law, John Rawls.

So in 1971, he writes this book called A Theory of Justice.

which is this just massive and incredible book of philosophy.

A tome.

A tome, if you will.

Yeah, and it's impossible to overstate just how influential this philosopher was.

In A Theory of Justice, Rawls posits this feature called the veil of ignorance.

And so his basic question is, how can we guarantee fair and just outcomes to every member of society? If we had to have people decide on what those principles of justice were, he thinks those people should be forced to rationalize away everything about their standpoints.

In the essay, Berlin distinguishes between two concepts, negative liberty and positive liberty.

Now, if you remember our episode on freedom back in episode 58, I talked about Eric Fromm and his book, Escape from Freedom, where he distinguishes between freedom from and freedom to.

Berlin's concept sounds very similar, but he's doing something a little bit different here.

Instead of primarily exploring what happens to individuals when they gain freedom and then struggle with it, Berlin is exploring the different ways we can understand freedom itself, particularly in political life.

and then keep questioning yourself after.

Keep learning, keep listening, and every once in a while, keep an eye out for those damn horseshoes.

And if you want a possible fun thought experiment to help yourself determine closer to what you personally really think on a political level, ask yourself the question made famous by American philosopher John Rawls in his 1971 book, A Theory of Justice.

Using a thought experiment called the veil of ignorance, imagine you're designing society, but you don't know whether you'll be, you know, rich or poor, healthy or with some disability, born male or female, talented or untalented, born into a powerful family or an impoverished one, religious or non-religious.

How are we supposed to know the difference? Closed Stacks then goes on to talk about how he's reading a very complicated book.

It's John R.'s Theory of Justice.

And as he's been going through it for several months, he can safely say it's the hardest book he's ever read.

There are pages he's gone through several times, and he still has no idea what he's talking about.