Heads of households in the original position

Reference no: EM13521607

Okin says (Ch. 5) that because Rawls only includes “heads of households” in the original position, the deliberators cannot ask certain questions about justice, namely, questions pertaining to sexual hierarchy and privilege as it exists in the family. We could understand this to mean that we need more information in the original position than what Rawls allows in order to make intelligent decisions about what justice requires. Roper too seems to make a similar argument. On p. 51, he argues that in order for deliberators to make intelligent (informed) decisions about healthcare justice, deliberators would have to be aware of certain kinds of economic information. Again, we see an author arguing that more information about the world needs to be included in the original position in order for deliberators to make good decisions.

(1)
If we need to include worldly information in the original position in order to make good decisions, where do we stop? Indeed, why not just start from real, existing social conditions in order to theorize about justice instead of starting, as Rawls does, with the ideal situation of the original position?

Argue whether you think it is better to theorize about justice starting from existing social conditions (e.g. existing conditions of poverty, existing conditions of oppression, etc.) or whether you think it is better to start from ideal conditions (as Rawls does). By “argue,” I mean you should present at least one developed reason as to why you think one is better than the other.

If you think that it is better to theorize about justice starting from ideal conditions (like the original position) then say what is special about this methodology that enables one to better know what is required of justice which the alternative approach does not allow.

If you think it is better to theorize about justice starting from the ground up, starting from existing social conditions (e.g., existing conditions of class inequality, existing conditions of sexism, existing conditions of oppression or social exclusion, etc.) then say what is special about this methodology that enables one to better know what is required of justice which the alternative approach does not allow.

Reference no: EM13521607

Questions Cloud

Discuss the greatest happiness principle : Discuss the Greatest Happiness principle and the role it plays in Utilitarianism. More specifically, how does Mill use this principle to develop an ethical theory that promotes social progress?

Benthams approach and mills approach to utilitarianism : Distinguish between Bentham's approach and Mill's approach to Utilitarianism. More specifically, distinguish their respective understandings of pleasure and pain.

Observations that previously supported theory are in doubt : A system has less complexity than the situation it is designed to explain. Scientific theories are models or systems that loosely fit aspects of a territory we've learned something about. If evidence casts doubt on a theory, then the observations tha..

Elizabeth v. speimen from her article woman as body : Elizabeth V. Speimen from her article "Woman as Body." Do you believe that true knowledge is best achieved through the ability to think logically? What is the role of emotions- and what the psychologist Daniel Coleman calls emotional intelligence..

Heads of households in the original position : Rawls only includes “heads of households” in the original position, the deliberators cannot ask certain questions about justice, namely, questions pertaining to sexual hierarchy and privilege as it exists in the family. We could understand this to..

Parallelism to interpret the meaning of a passage : How would you use the parallelism to interpret the meaning of a passage? What is the value of knowing about the parallel?

External world amounts to philosophical hypocrisy : Do you agree with David Hume that appealing to Gods existence in order to support the belief that there is an external world amounts to philosophical hypocrisy? Why or why not?

Example of both free and unfree elements : Give an example of an action that you did that has both free and "unfree" elements. Explain both how the action is done freely, and how the action was not fully free. Was the action more free than "unfree," or vice versa? Explain.

Explain what determines human behavior : Explain what determines human behavior according to each of the following: Leucippus, Holbach, and Blatchford. Which one of those three views is the most plausible? Why? What problems do you see in the other two views?

User Account

All Pages