In today’s class, we talked a lot about ethical citizenship.
An American philosopher named John Rawls came up with his theory of a justice of
fairness, called “A Theory of Justice”. He came to this conclusive theory by
imagining moral agents in an original position, or before society was created.
He imagined them behind a veil of ignorance and tried to determine the rules
they would all agree upon as guidelines for society. In doing this, he came up
with two significant principles: the Liberty Principle and the Difference
Principle.
The Liberty Principle was based on ensuring equal rights to
the most extensive set of basic liberties, which is compatible with a similar
liberty for everyone else. This includes freedom of speech, press, religion,
though, person, owning private property, the ability to hold office and vote,
and the right of due process.
The Difference Principle was split into two parts. The social
and economic inequalities are to be arranged such that:
a)
They are to the greatest benefit of the least
advantaged and
b)
They are attached to positions and offices open
to everyone under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
The example that we used in class was one in which a person
who is disabled or unemployed can receive government aid if and only if he or
she can prove that work is simply impossible to find or attain. This made me think
of other possible examples that would apply, like child support. Even though it
is not government aid, it is enforced by the government so that the parent that
doesn’t have sole custody must pay the other parent monthly payments in order
to help take care of the child. In order case, the child would be the “least
advantaged” since he or she obviously cannot care for him or herself. Aside
from being a happy, unified family (which is completely off topic), this child
support would be of the greatest benefit to the child because it would help
finance the numerous necessities a child requires. I may be way off topic with
this example, but this just came to mind as we were in class discussing these
ethical principles.
I feel like you have a decent point that it is true that the child would be the "least advantaged" and that the child support would be the greatest benefit, however I don't believe that that necessarily falls under what the point of the Difference Principle is. The point of the Difference Principle was to recognize that we are all different but that should not cause inequality among us. I'm not sure if you can classify a child as an economic inequality just yet since they don't have a way to be an economic equality (or inequality). Child support just doesn't fit quite right underneath the Difference Principle.
ReplyDelete