Summary Solidarity and Social Justice
1. Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Boston: Harvard University Press. Chapter 1: Justice as
Fairness pp. 3-22.
This chapter is about: role of justice in social cooperation, justice as basic structure of society, justice
as fairness = theory of justice that generalizes and carries to a higher level of abstraction the
traditional conception of social contract, initial situation which leads to an original agreement on
principles of justice, classical utilitarian and intuitionist conceptions of justice
The role of justice
Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth of systems of thought = so justice should be the
foundation of social institutions just as truth is the foundation of theories, scientists and academia.
So laws and institutions that are unjust should be reformed or abolished.
Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice which even the welfare of society cannot
override (= justice has to be respected and not ignored). For this reason injustice denies that the loss
of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others, so no sacrifice is allowed on a
few by the larger sum of advantaged enjoyed by many. Therefore in a just society the liberties of
equal citizenship are taken as settled. The only thing that permits to acquiesce in an erroneous
theory is the lack of a better one = injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even
greater injustice.
These propositions express out intuitive conviction of the primacy of justice. It is according to Rawls
necessary to work out a theory of justice in which these assertions can be interpreted and assessed.
We begin with: the role of principles of justice.
Let us assume that a society is a self-sufficient association of persons who recognize certain rules of
conduct in relation to each other and who act in accordance to them. These rules specify a system of
cooperation designed to advance the good of those taking part in it.
Although a society is cooperative for mutual advantage (common interests, identity of interests), it
is typically also marked by a conflict of interests. That’s why we need principles of justice.
Identity of interests social cooperation makes possible a better life for all than any would
have if each were to live solely by his own efforts
Conflict of interests persons are not indifferent as to how the greater benefits produced
by their collaboration are distributed, they prefer a larger to a lesser share (of a pie)
Principles of justice set of principles is required for choosing among the various social
arrangements which determine this division of advantages and for underwriting an
agreement on the proper distributive shares. Principles of social justice provide a way of
assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society and they define the appropriate
distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation.
Now let us assume that a society is well-ordered to advance the good of its members and also
effectively regulated by a public conception of justice:
1. Society in which everybody accepts and knows that the others accept the same principles of
justice
2. The basic social institutions generally satisfy and are known for satisfying these principles
,This is a common point of view. Among individuals with disparate aims and purposes a shared
conception of justice establishes the bonds of civic friendship the general desire for justice limits
the pursuit of other ends.
Public conception of justice = fundamental charter of a well-ordered human association
However, existing societies are of course seldom well-ordered in this sense, for what is just and
unjust is usually dispute – men disagree about which principles should define the basic terms of their
association. Despite this disagreement, each person has a conception of justice.
Conception of justice = meaning that people understand the need for, and are prepared to affirm, a
characteristic set of principles for assigning basic rights and duties and for determining what they
take to be the proper distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation. Distinctive role
of conceptions of justice is to specify basic rights and duties and to determine the appropriate
distributive shares.
So concept of justice is distinct from the various conceptions of justice and the concept of justice is
specified by the role which these different set of principles, these different conceptions, have in
common. Those who hold different conceptions of justice still agree that institutions are just when
no arbitrary (depending on individual discretion, not designed by law) distinctions are made between
people in assigning of the basic rights and duties and whet the rules determine a proper balance
between competing claims to the advantages of social life.
Concept of justice = no arbitrary distinction between people and a proper balance between
competing claims to the advantages of social life; proper balance between competing claims from a
conception of justice as a set of related principles for identifying the relevant considerations which
determine this balance; defined by the role of its principles in assigning rights and duties and in
defining the appropriate division of social advantages. A conception of justice is an interpretation of
this role.
That’s why people can agree to this description of just institutions since the concept of justice (equal
distribution and proper balance) is left open for each to interpret according to the principles of
justice that he accepts.
Clearly this distinction between the concept and the various conceptions of justice settles no
important questions. It simply helps to identify the role of the principles of social justice. So in
other words he is trying to make a distinction between the basic idea we might have about justice
(concept) and what we believe to be just but even just saying that those two things exist doesn’t do
anything to tell us what a just society looks like. But they are important to understand his argument.
For Rawls we cannot consider what we perceive to be just (those conceptions of justice) without first
having principles of justice.
So some measure of agreement in conceptions of justice is a prerequisite for a viable community.
Besides that, problems of coordination, efficiency and stability (other fundamental social problems)
are a prerequisite.
1. Coordination: Thus the plans of individuals need to be fitted together, compatible with each
other so that they can be carried through without anyone’s expectations being disappointed.
2. Efficiency: The execution of these plans should lead to achievement of social ends in ways
that are efficient and consistent with justice.
3. Stability: the scheme of social cooperation must be more or less regularly complied with and
its basic rules willingly acted upon. There should be stabilizing forces when infractions occur.
,These problems (coordination, efficiency, stability) are connected with justice. When there is absence
of a certain measure of agreement on what is just, it is more difficult for individuals to coordinate
their plans efficiently in order to insure that mutually beneficial arrangements are maintained.
Distrust, resentment and suspicion tempt men to act in ways they would otherwise avoid.
Distinctive role of conceptions of justice is to specify basic rights and duties and to determine the
appropriate distributive shares. The way in which a conception of justice does this is bound to affect
the problems of efficiency, coordination and stability.
Justice has priority, being the most important virtue of institutions, but it is still true that one
conception of justice is preferable to another when its broader consequences are more desirable.
The subject of justice
Primary subject of justice = basic structure of society, the way in which major social institutions
distribute fundamental rights and duties and determine the division of advantages from social
cooperation
Major social institutions =
o political constitution and principal economic and social arrangements;
o legal protection of freedom of thought and liberty of conscience, competitive
markets, private property in the means of production, monogamous families;
o major institutions define men’s rights and duties and influence their life prospects,
what they can expect to be
The basic structure of society is the primary subject of justice because its effects are so profound and
present form the start. This structure contains various social positions with some favored over others
= inequalities which affect people’s initial chances in life.
Inequalities, presumably inevitable in the basic structure of any society, are the things to which
principles of social justice must apply. These principles, then, regulate the choice of a political
constitution and main elements of the economic and social system. The justice of a social scheme
depends then on the economic opportunities and social conditions in the various sectors of society.
This research is limited in two ways:
1. The concern is with a special case of problem of justice. There is no reason to suppose ahead
of time that the principles of justice satisfactory for the basic structure hold for all cases.
Rawls is satisfied if it is possible to formulate a reasonable conception of justice for the basic
structure of society conceived at the time being as a closed system isolated from other societies.
Once with have a sound theory for this case the remaining problems will prove more tractable. With
some suitable modifications such theory (conception of justice) should provide the key for some of
the other questions.
2. Rawls examines the principles of justice that would regulate a well-ordered society.
Everybody is presumed to act justly and to do his part in upholding just institutions. We can
still ask what a perfectly just society would be like (so it is not practical).
The reason for beginning with ideal theory is that it provides the only basis for the systematic grasp
of these more pressing problems (like civil disobedience, just war, theory of punishment)
, The point to keep in mind is that a conception of justice for the basic structure is worth having for its
own sake. It should not be dismissed because its principles are not everywhere satisfactory.
Conception of social justice = provides in the first instance a standard whereby the distributive
aspects of the basic structure of society are to be assessed; principles of justice
Social ideal = a complete conception
defining principles for all the virtues of the
basic structure, together with their
respective weights when they conflict;
connected with conception of society, a
vision of the way in which the aims and
purposes of social cooperation are to be
understood
The various conceptions of justice are the
outgrowth of different notions of society
against the background of opposing views
of the natural necessities and opportunities
of human life.
To understand conception of justice we must make explicit the conception of social cooperation from
which it derives. In doing so we must not forget the special role of principles of justice or the primary
subject to which they apply.
The main idea of the theory of justice
The guiding idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the
original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their
own interests would accept in an initial position of equality. These principles are fundamental, to
regulate all further agreements: they specify the kind of social cooperation that can be entered into
and the forms of government that can be established. Justice as fairness is referring to these
principles agreed to in this initial position which is neutral and fair.
So we have to imagine that people who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint
act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social
benefits, what is the foundation charter of the society? Decision by rational reflection, group of
persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust.
The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty
determines the principles of justice.
Initial position = original position, appropriate initial status quo, hypothetical situation characterized
as to lead to a certain conception of justice, in this position no one knows his place in society, his
class position or social status, nor abilities, intelligence etc. parties in the initial situation are rational
and mutually disinterested. The initial situation must be characterized by stipulations that are widely
accepted. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. Fundamental agreements
reached in initial position are fair = justice as fairness.
Veil of ignorance = ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles, no
one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result
of a fair agreement or bargain
1. Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Boston: Harvard University Press. Chapter 1: Justice as
Fairness pp. 3-22.
This chapter is about: role of justice in social cooperation, justice as basic structure of society, justice
as fairness = theory of justice that generalizes and carries to a higher level of abstraction the
traditional conception of social contract, initial situation which leads to an original agreement on
principles of justice, classical utilitarian and intuitionist conceptions of justice
The role of justice
Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth of systems of thought = so justice should be the
foundation of social institutions just as truth is the foundation of theories, scientists and academia.
So laws and institutions that are unjust should be reformed or abolished.
Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice which even the welfare of society cannot
override (= justice has to be respected and not ignored). For this reason injustice denies that the loss
of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others, so no sacrifice is allowed on a
few by the larger sum of advantaged enjoyed by many. Therefore in a just society the liberties of
equal citizenship are taken as settled. The only thing that permits to acquiesce in an erroneous
theory is the lack of a better one = injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even
greater injustice.
These propositions express out intuitive conviction of the primacy of justice. It is according to Rawls
necessary to work out a theory of justice in which these assertions can be interpreted and assessed.
We begin with: the role of principles of justice.
Let us assume that a society is a self-sufficient association of persons who recognize certain rules of
conduct in relation to each other and who act in accordance to them. These rules specify a system of
cooperation designed to advance the good of those taking part in it.
Although a society is cooperative for mutual advantage (common interests, identity of interests), it
is typically also marked by a conflict of interests. That’s why we need principles of justice.
Identity of interests social cooperation makes possible a better life for all than any would
have if each were to live solely by his own efforts
Conflict of interests persons are not indifferent as to how the greater benefits produced
by their collaboration are distributed, they prefer a larger to a lesser share (of a pie)
Principles of justice set of principles is required for choosing among the various social
arrangements which determine this division of advantages and for underwriting an
agreement on the proper distributive shares. Principles of social justice provide a way of
assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society and they define the appropriate
distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation.
Now let us assume that a society is well-ordered to advance the good of its members and also
effectively regulated by a public conception of justice:
1. Society in which everybody accepts and knows that the others accept the same principles of
justice
2. The basic social institutions generally satisfy and are known for satisfying these principles
,This is a common point of view. Among individuals with disparate aims and purposes a shared
conception of justice establishes the bonds of civic friendship the general desire for justice limits
the pursuit of other ends.
Public conception of justice = fundamental charter of a well-ordered human association
However, existing societies are of course seldom well-ordered in this sense, for what is just and
unjust is usually dispute – men disagree about which principles should define the basic terms of their
association. Despite this disagreement, each person has a conception of justice.
Conception of justice = meaning that people understand the need for, and are prepared to affirm, a
characteristic set of principles for assigning basic rights and duties and for determining what they
take to be the proper distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation. Distinctive role
of conceptions of justice is to specify basic rights and duties and to determine the appropriate
distributive shares.
So concept of justice is distinct from the various conceptions of justice and the concept of justice is
specified by the role which these different set of principles, these different conceptions, have in
common. Those who hold different conceptions of justice still agree that institutions are just when
no arbitrary (depending on individual discretion, not designed by law) distinctions are made between
people in assigning of the basic rights and duties and whet the rules determine a proper balance
between competing claims to the advantages of social life.
Concept of justice = no arbitrary distinction between people and a proper balance between
competing claims to the advantages of social life; proper balance between competing claims from a
conception of justice as a set of related principles for identifying the relevant considerations which
determine this balance; defined by the role of its principles in assigning rights and duties and in
defining the appropriate division of social advantages. A conception of justice is an interpretation of
this role.
That’s why people can agree to this description of just institutions since the concept of justice (equal
distribution and proper balance) is left open for each to interpret according to the principles of
justice that he accepts.
Clearly this distinction between the concept and the various conceptions of justice settles no
important questions. It simply helps to identify the role of the principles of social justice. So in
other words he is trying to make a distinction between the basic idea we might have about justice
(concept) and what we believe to be just but even just saying that those two things exist doesn’t do
anything to tell us what a just society looks like. But they are important to understand his argument.
For Rawls we cannot consider what we perceive to be just (those conceptions of justice) without first
having principles of justice.
So some measure of agreement in conceptions of justice is a prerequisite for a viable community.
Besides that, problems of coordination, efficiency and stability (other fundamental social problems)
are a prerequisite.
1. Coordination: Thus the plans of individuals need to be fitted together, compatible with each
other so that they can be carried through without anyone’s expectations being disappointed.
2. Efficiency: The execution of these plans should lead to achievement of social ends in ways
that are efficient and consistent with justice.
3. Stability: the scheme of social cooperation must be more or less regularly complied with and
its basic rules willingly acted upon. There should be stabilizing forces when infractions occur.
,These problems (coordination, efficiency, stability) are connected with justice. When there is absence
of a certain measure of agreement on what is just, it is more difficult for individuals to coordinate
their plans efficiently in order to insure that mutually beneficial arrangements are maintained.
Distrust, resentment and suspicion tempt men to act in ways they would otherwise avoid.
Distinctive role of conceptions of justice is to specify basic rights and duties and to determine the
appropriate distributive shares. The way in which a conception of justice does this is bound to affect
the problems of efficiency, coordination and stability.
Justice has priority, being the most important virtue of institutions, but it is still true that one
conception of justice is preferable to another when its broader consequences are more desirable.
The subject of justice
Primary subject of justice = basic structure of society, the way in which major social institutions
distribute fundamental rights and duties and determine the division of advantages from social
cooperation
Major social institutions =
o political constitution and principal economic and social arrangements;
o legal protection of freedom of thought and liberty of conscience, competitive
markets, private property in the means of production, monogamous families;
o major institutions define men’s rights and duties and influence their life prospects,
what they can expect to be
The basic structure of society is the primary subject of justice because its effects are so profound and
present form the start. This structure contains various social positions with some favored over others
= inequalities which affect people’s initial chances in life.
Inequalities, presumably inevitable in the basic structure of any society, are the things to which
principles of social justice must apply. These principles, then, regulate the choice of a political
constitution and main elements of the economic and social system. The justice of a social scheme
depends then on the economic opportunities and social conditions in the various sectors of society.
This research is limited in two ways:
1. The concern is with a special case of problem of justice. There is no reason to suppose ahead
of time that the principles of justice satisfactory for the basic structure hold for all cases.
Rawls is satisfied if it is possible to formulate a reasonable conception of justice for the basic
structure of society conceived at the time being as a closed system isolated from other societies.
Once with have a sound theory for this case the remaining problems will prove more tractable. With
some suitable modifications such theory (conception of justice) should provide the key for some of
the other questions.
2. Rawls examines the principles of justice that would regulate a well-ordered society.
Everybody is presumed to act justly and to do his part in upholding just institutions. We can
still ask what a perfectly just society would be like (so it is not practical).
The reason for beginning with ideal theory is that it provides the only basis for the systematic grasp
of these more pressing problems (like civil disobedience, just war, theory of punishment)
, The point to keep in mind is that a conception of justice for the basic structure is worth having for its
own sake. It should not be dismissed because its principles are not everywhere satisfactory.
Conception of social justice = provides in the first instance a standard whereby the distributive
aspects of the basic structure of society are to be assessed; principles of justice
Social ideal = a complete conception
defining principles for all the virtues of the
basic structure, together with their
respective weights when they conflict;
connected with conception of society, a
vision of the way in which the aims and
purposes of social cooperation are to be
understood
The various conceptions of justice are the
outgrowth of different notions of society
against the background of opposing views
of the natural necessities and opportunities
of human life.
To understand conception of justice we must make explicit the conception of social cooperation from
which it derives. In doing so we must not forget the special role of principles of justice or the primary
subject to which they apply.
The main idea of the theory of justice
The guiding idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the
original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their
own interests would accept in an initial position of equality. These principles are fundamental, to
regulate all further agreements: they specify the kind of social cooperation that can be entered into
and the forms of government that can be established. Justice as fairness is referring to these
principles agreed to in this initial position which is neutral and fair.
So we have to imagine that people who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint
act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social
benefits, what is the foundation charter of the society? Decision by rational reflection, group of
persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust.
The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty
determines the principles of justice.
Initial position = original position, appropriate initial status quo, hypothetical situation characterized
as to lead to a certain conception of justice, in this position no one knows his place in society, his
class position or social status, nor abilities, intelligence etc. parties in the initial situation are rational
and mutually disinterested. The initial situation must be characterized by stipulations that are widely
accepted. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. Fundamental agreements
reached in initial position are fair = justice as fairness.
Veil of ignorance = ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles, no
one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result
of a fair agreement or bargain
