Balancing Principles of Justice

What is Justice? 

The notion that justice entails giving each person his or her due, remains an important part of our modern understanding of justice.

However, since Plato’s time, our understanding of what is owed to a person has evolved. Today, our understanding of what is just is inextricably linked to our understanding of what each person owes as a human being. Human beings have dignity, according to German philosopher Immanuel Kant. If all people are treated with dignity, they are entitled to the opportunity to develop their talents and pursue their desired goals. Justice necessitates that we treat all people fairly and equally.

Treating Equals the Same

Although there is widespread agreement in modern society that all people are equally important, determining how to give each person his or her due is not an easy task. Several different principles have been proposed in this regard. The principle of treating equals equally is one of them. As human beings, all individuals are thought to share certain characteristics. As a result, they are entitled to equal rights and treatment. Civil rights such as the rights to life, liberty, and property are among the important rights granted in most liberal democracies today, as are political rights such as the right to vote, which allows people to participate in political processes, and certain social rights such as the right to work. The right to be treated equally with other members of society

Balancing Principles of Justice

• Emphasising satisfying value as the main principle of justice might mean that marginalised sections would be at a drawback in numerous areas
• Other groups in the country might accommodate different policies depending upon which principle of justice they emphasise
• It is the responsibility of governments to harmonise the various principles in order to promote a just society

Need for Just Distribution

• To Achieve Social Justice: 
• Governments might have to do more than just ensure that laws and policies serve individuals in a fair form
• It also concerns the just distribution of goods and services, whether it is between nations or between different groups and individuals within a society 
• Need of redistribution of resources: There are serious economic or social inequalities in a society
• Within a country social justice would demand not only that people be treated equally in terms of the laws and policies of the society but also that they enjoy some essential parity of life conditions and chances
• For example- Different state governments have also taken some measures to redistribute important resources like land in a more fair manner by instituting land reforms

John Rawls’ Theory of Justice

Rawls has debated that there could indeed be a rational alibi for acknowledging the need to give support to the least privileged members of a society. 

Veil of Ignorance:

• It cannot be expected that everyone puts aside their personal interests and thinks of the good of society, especially with keeping personal interest in mind of their future generations. Such perspectives can not form the base of a theory of justice for a society 
• Reaching a fair and just decision: John Rawls argues that the only way to arrive at it is if we imagine ourselves to be in a situation in which we have to make opinions about how society should be organised although we don’t know which position we’d ourselves occupy in that society
• Simply, we do not know in which family we would be born like an ‘upper’ caste or ‘lower’ caste family, rich or poor, privileged or disadvantaged. In this case, we will be likely to support a decision about the rules and organisation of that future society which would be fair for all the members
• Rawls describes this as supposing under a ‘veil of ignorance’
• Fairness:
• Rawls expects that in such a situation of complete ignorance about our possible position and status in society, each person would decide in the way they generally do, that is, in terms of their own interests
• But since no Nobody knows who he’d be, and what’s going to benefit him, each will ideate the future society from the point of view of the worst-off  
• It’ll be clear to a person who can reason and think for himself, that those who are born privileged will enjoy some special opportunities
• Rational self: It would appear to be legit for every individual, acting to their own advantage, to attempt to consider decisions of association that will guarantee sensible freedoms to the weaker sections. The trial will subsist to witness that important resources, like education, health, shelter,etc., are available to all
• It’s of course not simple to erase our identities and to imagine oneself under a veil of ignorance. But moreover it’s equally tough for most people to be self- sacrificing and share their good fortune with Unknowns
• Given these human faults and limitations, it’s better for us to think of a frame that doesn’t demand extraordinary actions  
• Wearing the conceived veil of ignorance is the initial step in getting through a system of fair laws and policies  
• Rawls consequently argues that intelligent thinking, not morality, could lead us to be fair and judge impartially regarding how to sort the benefits and burdens of a society
•  In his illustration, there are no aims or ethics of morality that are given to us in advance and we abide free to decide what’s best for ourselves  
• It’s this faith which makes Rawls’ theory an important and effective way to approach the question of fairness and justice

In Conclusion:- 

Just as we intuitively understand what love means even if we can’t explain all of its different shades of meaning, we intuitively understand justice even if we can’t define it precisely. In that sense, justice is similar to love. Furthermore, both love and justice elicit passionate responses from their supporters. And, like love, no one hates justice; everyone wants justice for themselves and, to a lesser extent, for others. But, unlike love, which is an aspect of our relationships with a few people we know well, justice is concerned with our social lives, the manner in which public life is organised, and the principles by which social goods and social duties are distributed among us.