[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.It isnot motivated by the end of eliminating the influence of luck or ofbringing about any particular allocation of goods.The basic structuremust satisfy the principles of justice in order to ensure that individualsare able to interact on the basis of reciprocity without dominationor subordination.As Christine Korsgaard has pointed out,  [t]hesubject matter of morality is not what we should bring about, buthow we should relate to one another.If only Rawls has succeeded inescaping utilitarianism, it is because only Rawls has fully grasped thispoint. 96The principles of justice apply to the basic structure of societybecause that is what citizens collectively create, share, and imposeon themselves to mediate their interactions.The virtue of justice isnot a response to the arbitrariness of the world but rather to theneed for fairness in the interactions among people with different andconflicting conceptions of the good.A just basic structure establishesfair terms of cooperation.Here it is useful to be reminded of Rawls smodel of a property-owning democracy.The idea is that property iskept widely distributed in the society to allow individuals to pursuetheir various goals without being dependent on or subordinated toanyone else.This emphasis on fair terms of interaction informs notonly the interpretation of the difference principle but all of justiceas fairness.At its core, justice as fairness is about establishing andmaintaining relations of reciprocity among the members of a society.The virtue of social justice would not have a point if people did nothave goals and ends that they took to be valuable and pursued individ-ually and in groups.The problem of justice arises when these valuesdiverge yet individuals want to establish fair terms of interaction withone another.The principles of justice cannot be all controlling with-out denying the independent value of the different conceptions ofthe good.Yet, a society can only have one basic structure  one set ofbasic institutions to mediate the interactions among citizens.There-fore, its design cannot be predicated on any single comprehensivedoctrine but must be based on principles that all can recognize to be96Christine Korsgaard,  The Reasons We Can Share [1993] inCreating the Kingdom of Ends(Cambridge University Press, 1996), p.275.200 Rawls s A Theory of Justicefair.A well-ordered society does not eliminate the influence of luckor achieve any particular pattern of the distribution of goods.Rather,it establishes terms of interaction that do not deny or underminethe diversity of reasonable doctrines, but achieves fairness that all canrecognize.The lasting legacy of A Theory of Justice is that it helps us tosee that fair terms of interaction are compatible with diverse values.Once we see that a just society is possible in conditions of pluralism,we can also see that it is worth struggling to achieve.BibliographyWORKS BY JOHN RAWLSA Study in the Grounds of Ethical Knowledge (PhD Dissertation, PrincetonUniversity, 1950).A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, 1971; rev.edn, 1999) (textcitations to TJ). John Rawls: For the Record, The Harvard Review of Philosophy (spring,1991).Political Liberalism (Columbia University Press, 1993; expanded edn, 2005)(text citations to PL).Collected Papers, Samuel Freeman, ed.(Harvard University Press, 1999).The Law of Peoples (Harvard University Press, 1999).Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, Barbara Herman, ed.(HarvardUniversity Press, 2000).Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Erin Kelly, ed.(Harvard University Press,2001). Afterword: A Reminiscence in Future Pasts: The Analytic Tradition inTwentieth-Century Philosophy, Juliet Floyd and Sanford Shieh, eds.(Oxford University Press, 2001).Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy, Samuel Freeman, ed.(HarvardUniversity Press, 2007).A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin and Faith: With  On My Religion,Thomas Nagel, ed.(Harvard University Press, 2009).BOOKS AND COLLECTIONS ON RAWLS ANDA THEORY OF JUSTICE Symposium on the Reception of Rawls in Europe, European Journal ofPolitical Theory, 1 (2002).Barry, Brian, The Liberal Theory of Justice (Oxford University Press, 1973).Blocker, H.Gene and Elizabeth H.Smith, eds., John Rawls s Theory of SocialJustice (Ohio University Press, 1980).201202 BibliographyDaniels, Norman, ed., Reading Rawls: Critical Studies on Rawls  A Theory ofJustice (Stanford University Press, 1989).Freeman, Samuel, Justice and the Social Contract: Essays on Rawlsian PoliticalPhilosophy (Oxford University Press, 2007).Rawls (Routledge, 2007).Freeman, Samuel, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Rawls (CambridgeUniversity Press, 2003).Kukathas, Chandran and Philip Pettit, Rawls:  A Theory of Justice and itsCritics (Stanford University Press, 1990).Mandle, Jon, What s Left of Liberalism? An Interpretation and Defense ofJustice as Fairness (Lexington Books, 2000).Martin, Rex, Rawls and Rights (Kansas University Press, 1985).Pogge, Thomas, Realizing Rawls (Cornell University Press, 1989).John Rawls: His Life and Theory of Justice (Oxford University Press, 2007).Richardson, Henry and Paul Weithman, eds., The Philosophy of Rawls: ACollection of Essays, 5 vols.(Garland, 1999).Talisse, Robert, On Rawls (Wadsworth, 2001).Wolff, Robert Paul, Understanding Rawls: A Reconciliation and Critique of A Theory of Justice (Princeton University Press, 1977) [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]