What does it mean to give each person his/her due? How has the meaning of “giving each his due” changed over time?
To give each person his/her due is providing justice to everyone by ensuring the wellbeing of all.
The idea of providing justice to everyone i.e. providing all their due is the integral part of present day life. It has continued to be an important part of our present day understanding of justice.
However, the idea has changed from the time of Plato (Political Thinker), today the notion of what is just is closely linked to providing justice to everyone as a human being.
A German philosopher Immanuel Kant argued, that if all person are granted dignity, then what is due to them is the opportunity to develop their talents.
Briefly discuss the three principles of justice outlined in the chapter? Explain each with examples.
The three principles of justice are:
a. Treating equals equally:
1. This means treating people equally.
2. Providing equal rights and treatment.
3. Includes civil rights such as Right to life, liberty and property, Political rights like Right to Vote and Social Rights like right to enjoy equal opportunity.
4. Prohibits Discrimination against on grounds of class, creed, race, gender etc.
b. Proportionate Justice:
1. This means rewarding people as per their efforts and skills required.
2. This proportionality provides balance to the principle of equal treatment.
3. Example: A carpenter and Policemen are not rewarded equally due to difference in nature of the job.
c. Recognition of Special Needs:
1. This means distributing rewards on the special needs of the people.
2. On the basis of disability, special care is provided to the aggrieved including special grants in education, work or health care etc.
3. This is provided in order to keep them at par with the level of general people. To provide them equal opportunity in order to show their skill.
4. Example: A physically challenged person getting extra time in exams, is the recognition of special need.
Does the principle of considering the special needs of people conflict with the principle of equal treatment for all?
No, the principle of considering the special needs of people does not conflict with the principle of equal treatment for all.
a. Sometimes even non-discrimination between people and rewarding them proportionately to their efforts might not be enough to ensure equality and social Justice. So, taking in account the special needs of people and treating them differently provides social justice.
Example: for a disabled person having seats reserved in bus/train, is providing social justice and does not hinders Equality for all.
b. People with special needs are given special treatment to facilitate their participation in this running society.
c. The senior citizens, women, children and disabled are given special treatment due to their special needs.
How does Rawls use the idea of a veil of ignorance to argue that fair and just distribution can be defended on rational grounds?
John rawl has argued that the only way we can establish fair and just rule is if we imagine that , we have been given the task to take decision about how a society to be organised although we do not know under which category we fall into i.e. caste , creed , religion etc.
Since we do not know the options that will be available to us in future, we would try to make a society which would be fair to all. This thought is known as Veil of Ignorance.
a. He believes that in such ignorance about our possible position in future, one would try to build a society that benefits all.
b. It becomes easy to reason that those who are born privileged will enjoy certain opportunities, but if born in a disadvantaged section of society then would be devoid of those opportunities.
What are generally considered to be the basic minimum requirements of people for living a healthy and productive life? What is the responsibility of governments in trying to ensure this minimum to all?
Various methods have been calculated to derive basic minimum requirement to enable every people to lead a healthy and dignified life, by governments and WHO. But in general. it is agreed that the basic amount of nourishment needed to remain healthy, housing, supply of clean drinking water, education and a minimum wage would constitute an important part of these basic conditions.
This is an agreed norm worldwide that these basic needs to be fulfilled by the state. The responsibility of government to ensure this minimum to all are:
a. Private agencies should be encouraged to provide services in health, education, food etc and state/ government through policies should empower the people to buy those services
b. It must be duty of state to provide special help to sick and old.
c. The state should maintain a framework of laws and regulation to ensure that competition between individuals remains free of coercion
Which of the following arguments could be used to justify state action to provide basic minimum conditions of life to all citizens?
A. Providing free services to the poor and needy can be justified as an act of charity.
B. Providing all citizens with a basic minimum standard of living is one way of ensuring equality of opportunity.
C. Some people are naturally lazy and we should be kind to them.
D. Ensuring basic facilities and a minimum standard of living to all is a recognition of our shared humanity and a human right.
a. Providing free services to the poor and needy can be justified as an act of charity.
No, It is unjustified because getting free services like food, shelter and education is their rights. As our constitution mentions that providing basic minimum condition to poor and needy is the responsibility of the government.
b. Providing all citizens with a basic minimum standard of living is one way of ensuring equality of opportunity.
Yes, It is justified as it is the responsibility of the state to provide basic minimum condition to the people.
c. Some people are naturally lazy and we should be kind to them.
No, it is not justified because being lazy is not a disability . So being kind to them is not justified.
d. Ensuring basic facilities and a minimum standard of living to all is a recognition of our shared humanity and a human right.
Answer: Yes, it is justified because Ensuring basic facilities and a minimum standard of living to all is a recognition of our shared humanity and a human right.