Write a draft dealing with the case Robot Druggie

JOHN RAWLS OUTLINE FOR RAWLS ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................... 3

RAWLS CONTRACT THEORY Hypothetical Imperative Recall the Kantian Categorical Imperative which is a rule that must be followed, no matter what. Rawls gives us a hypothetical imperative. A hypothetical imperative says that suppose this were the case, then we ought to do this. Like Hobbes & Locke, Rawls is trying to imagine a state of nature where everyone begins with true equality, or at least begins without a sense of privilege. Counterfactual is an imaginary situation used to persuade in favor of a theory. Here is the Rawlsian counterfactual:

RAWLS VEIL OF IGNORANCE Imagine a group of people assembled in a room to create a government and laws. Imagine also that everyone in this group has severe amnesia and cannot see themselves or others.They also cannot feel themselves or others.

RAWLS ORIGINAL POSITION: a society that does not start w/ prejudice Those in the Original Position are color-blind, class-blind, blind to educational level, blind to gender, blind to sexual orientation, blind to religious affiliation, blind to special needs, etc. Rawls maintains that if we made laws & governments, or if we examined fairness under this veil of ignorance, we would logically end up with his system, thus Rawls bridges suppose to ought.

He claims that, given the Original Position, rational agents under a veil of ignorance would agree to his PRINCIPLES 1 and 2 stated here:

PRINCIPLE 1. Each person has equal RIGHT to most extensive LIBERTIES compatible w/ liberties for all (NEGATIVE RIGHTS) We would be concerned that we all get enough basic freedom

PRINCIPLE 2. Distribute benefits and burdens so that both:

B. Offices and positions are open to all (EQUAL OPPORTUNITY) We would be concerned that we have a chance to having some control over what happens, if we want to have that control. (Equal Opportunity at government positions.) We would also be concerned that we have equal shot at applying for jobs in an open market. (Equal Opportunity as Non-discrimination in the job market).

A. GREATEST BENEFIT possible arises for the least advantaged

We would be afraid we might be the worst off, so we would want to make those at the very bottom as well off as we could IMPORTANT: PRINCIPLE 1 over-rides PRINCIPLE 2-we would be most concerned that we get basic liberty. B over-rides A. Chance to improve as hope to rise above being at the very bottom is more important than being a little better off at the very bottom.

APPLYING RAWLS TO CASES RAWLS seriously means absolutely using this PRINCIPLE 1 over PRINCIPLE 2 because we would be most concerned that we get basic liberty B over-rides A. Chance to improve as hope to rise above being at the very bottom is more important than being a little better off at the very bottom. In other words, if you are hopeless about getting a better job but have food stamps and Xbox, you are pretty miserable. Better to do without the Xbox and have a chance at a job.

When applying Rawls you MUST follow the order he follows : 1. negative rights 2. equal chance for jobs 3. least advantaged

FAIRNESS for RAWLS means 1. NEGATIVE RIGHTS . Negative Rights are not violated. If negative rights are

violated but everyone has equal opportunity and least advantaged are not worse, STOP, DO NOT USE RAWLS. Use rights theory instead. You cannot go on from here with Rawls. If only negative rights are violated then it is a Negative Rights case, not a Rawls case. So, your first step is just to show first that everyone gets to keep their negative rights, or loses them

2. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY as in the Equal Opportunity Act Rawls is discussing jobs. Specifically, he is discussing hiring practices. Your second step is just to show whether anybody is losing chance for jobs (EQUAL OPPORTUNITY). Just show whether-there is job discrimination in hiring practices in your case. But you need to show this. You need to explain how the case relates to hiring practices. Even if there is no discrimination, you need to explain why there is none. Even if the case has nothing to do with hiring for jobs, you need to explain that the case has nothing to do with hiring. Equal opportunity does not mean equal chance for goods or services, it only means chance for jobs. Having no equal chance for jobs means you do not have the chance to rise above your status. For Rawls, opportunity for goods & services is going to be unequal. Not everyone is going to have the exact same amount of riches, etc. When Rawls discusses equal opportunity he means equal chance to apply for jobs and to be considered on your merit and qualifications. If you are poor, in this country you can still apply for any job. You should then be considered on your merit, not discriminated

against for any non-job related factors. The fact that you have less education disqualifies you possibly, but that is not primarily an issue of equal opportunity. Education is a service. Under least advantaged, that is where access to goods and services applies under Rawls. Also, it is important to recognize that preserving a whole field or industry is not part of the Rawls scenario of opportunity for jobs. He is not referring to making more jobs available and he is not referring to saving jobs that might be lost. Arguing this way is like arguing that we should all ride in a horse and buggy in order to preserve the jobs of blacksmiths. It is like saying we should all smoke cigarettes to preserve the tobacco industry. Having the chance to get a job in a particular field by preserving jobs in that field is not what Rawls means by equal opportunity.

3. LEAST ADVANTAGED . Only after you have covered Negative Rights & Equal Opportunity can you even begin to talk about Least Advantaged. By least advantaged Rawls is not referring to the least advantaged of those involved in the case you are discussing. He means least advantaged in society. The least advantaged are the poor, homeless, ill (least advantaged are not companies.) For example, if your case deals with homeowners seeking remodeling services then there are no least advantaged. The least advantaged do not own homes. Under least advantaged, that is where access to goods and services applies under Rawls. It is not the case that these should be equal, he tells us, instead, we should try to make the poorest able to be better off, make their access to goods and services as good as it could possibly be. For Rawls, it might not be possible to avoid having richest & poorest, but at least we must try to make the poorest as well off as we can. This, however, he tells us is something we want to look for only if it will not make jobs less open and only if it will not deprive everyone of negative rights.

This 3 step process is absolutely essential to Rawls. You must prove that a test is not violated, and you must prove when tests are violated.

OUTLINE FOR RAWLS ARGUMENT 1. DEFINE RAWLSIAN THEORY: Justice as fairness means negative rights are

preserved, there is equal opportunity for jobs, and the least advantaged are helped as much as possible while preserving negative rights and equal opportunity. (just copy and paste definition)

2. State in one sentence if the action violates Rawls or not. 3. State in one longer sentence how the action applies to this case: negative rights

are/are not preserved, there is/is not equal opportunity for jobs, and the least advantaged are/are not helped as much as possible.

4. DEFINE NEGATIVE RIGHTS Negative rights are a justified claim to be left alone. Just copy/paste the definition.

5. List in a sentence everyone who has negative rights involved. 6. In a paragraph for each group of people, state their negative rights.

7. Explain for each group if their negative rights are preserved or not, and why or how.

8. DEFINE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Offices and positions are open to all. Just copy/paste the definition.

9. State whether jobs are open to everyone or not. 10. If the case is not relevant to job opportunity, explain why the case is not related to

hiring practices. 11. If job opportunity is closed for some, explain who is being shut out & why. 12. DEFINE LEAST ADVANTAGED Members of society at the very bottom,

receiving least goods and services. Just copy/paste the definition. 13. Explain precisely who the least advantaged are in this case. 14. Describe their lives of disadvantage. 15. Explain how this case could or would result in worse or same or better conditions

for the least advantaged. 16. If least advantaged would be worse off because of the action, then describe what

their lives would be like. 17. End by recapping where the case is most relevant to Rawls (which test is most

relevant & why).