Rawls and Mill
...cide what is just or injustice. Moreover an injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even greatest injustice. For that reasons intuitionism appears more clearly in such cases. However John Rawls argues that “ there is a conflict of interests since persons are not indifferent as to how the greater benefits produced by their collaborations are distributed, for in order to pursue their ends they each prefer a larger to a lesser share”(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;3). He focuses on the ’ justice as fairness‘ is a distributive theory which lays stress on equality and opportunity, where all social primary goods i.e liberty-opportunity, income-wealth, the bases of self respect are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution is to benefit of the least advantaged.” Justice as fairness like other contract views consist of two parts:1) an interpretation of the initial situation and of the problem of choice posed there and 2)a set of principles which it is argued ,would be agreed to.”(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;15). Rawls ‘s theory defines good as right ; not independently and good is what is beneficial for all. In justice as fairness persons accept in advance a principle of equal liberty and they do this without any knowledge of their more particular ends.” The aim of the contract theory is to establish that taken together they impose significant bounds on acceptable principles of justice. .”(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;18). According to John Rawls by the concept of ‘original position’ all people or parties are equal. Although he also emphasizes that this original position is purely hypothetical ; it can be said that this contract theory aims up a society on the grounds of equality. “Justice as fairness attempts to account for these common sense convictions concerning the priority of justice by showing that they are the consequence of principles which would be chosen in the original position. ”(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;28). Likely John Stuart Mill ; John Rawls put emphasize on intuitionism. According to him ” intuitionism as the doctrine that there is an irreducible family of first principles which have to be weighed against one another by asking ourselves which balance , in our considered judgment , is the most just “(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;34). In that case intuinoists theories have two features; one of them is that they consist of a plurality of first principles and the other one is ;they include no priority rules. In that case John Rawls take intuitionism as pluralism. Intuitions are affected by the social interests. Then it is known that interests of an individual are different in a society. Moreover John Rawls argues that “not only are our everyday ideas of justice influenced by our own situation, they are also strongly colored by custom and current expectations. “(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;35) For priority problem,classical utilitarianism intend to avoid the appeal to intuition altogether. Ultimate end or ultimate standard is important for utilitarian is thus a species of intuitionism the distinctive characteristic of which is to find only one principlesel evident namely the utility principle. Maximizing happiness or utility seems that an answer to priority problem. In that case utilitarian theory seems to be individualistic theory, which grasp the right of justice, which lay in the hands of people. John Stuart Mill argues that first principle is the utilitarian principle ant the other principles may only support the utilitarian principle. By the way in a situation that there is a conflict between the secondary rules ; then according to John Stuart Mill intuitions may be reasonable to solve conflicts. On the other hand ; John Rawls that “ we must recognize the possibility that there is no way to get beyond a plurality of principles. No doubt any conception of justice will have to rely on intuition to some degree.”(A Theory Of Justice, Cambridge Mass ; Harvard University Press,1971 p;41). For that st...