Definition of Distributive Justice

Somehow we all agree on the need for a correct distribution in society of the goods, as we consider it unfair that some have an excess while others are in a situation from poverty. This idea of ​​the adequate distribution of goods is what inspires the concept of distributive justice.

The fundamental idea of ​​distributive justice according to John Rawls

Distributive justice is based on a aspiration general, social justice. One of the greatest theoretical exponents of the concept of distributive justice is the American philosopher John Rawls, who has developed a theory of justice.

According to Rawls, justice is the fundamental virtue of a society

This means that without a desire for justice the institutions social weaken. The desire for justice is due to the rejection of individualistic and selfish attitudes, since in a society With these generalized behaviors, a profound global imbalance would occur and, therefore, the injustice. Rawls argues that social noncooperation produces a quantity of

resources limited, but a cooperative system significantly increases resources. Consequently, for Rawls the fundamental question is how the fruits of the cooperation between men, that is, how the rights and obligations of men should be understood individuals. In other words, how the burdens and benefits that each one will obtain as a result of their cooperation should be distributed. Their proposals are the following:

- There must be a social contract that acts as a tool to make a society fairer.

- The contract or social pact must be based on the consensus of the citizens.

- The contract or social pact must be governed by the concept of impartiality and free agreement.

Rawls's idea of ​​fairness as the foundation of distributive justice

Let's imagine that the society consisted of 8 people and that all of them came together to create a model of justice. Suppose that after deliberating among themselves they came to the conclusion that it is necessary to implement a slave system. Their decision would be consensual but it would be unfair because slavery is by definition something undesirable.

According to Rawls, to prevent these people from proposing something unfair, it is necessary that they start from a deliberation without prejudice and without particular interests, what Rawls calls the "veil of ignorance", which means that none of the eight members of society knows what their role is or what their interests are individuals. Thus, if the deliberation between the eight people occurs with "the veil of ignorance" their initial position will be impartial and, consequently, more just. This reflection reminds us that symbol of justice is that of a woman with a blindfold.

Rawls recognizes that it is not easy to intellectually suppress social prejudices and interests private, but it is a necessary tool to create a rational choice about what should be the Justice. Rawls argues that for this to be possible it is necessary to apply three principles, that of Liberty, the difference and the equality of opportunities. This implies that individual freedom must be an essential aspect for a society to be fair, inequalities socioeconomic conditions are acceptable as long as it allows an improvement in the living conditions of all individuals. Finally, it will be possible to speak of justice if there is an effective criterion that respects equal opportunities for all individuals.

Photos: iStock - franckreporter / Onur Döngel

Distributive Justice Issues