JOHN RAWLS APPROACH TOWARD FAIR REDISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 14, 95 - 104, 31.12.2024

Ertuğrul Gökçekuyu

Öz

John Rawls'un adalet teorisi, özellikle ahlaki keyfiliğe yönelik eleştirisiyle çağdaş siyaset felsefesini derinden etkilemiştir. Bu makale, Rawls'un ahlaki keyfilik kavramsallaştırmasını inceleyerek, bireylerin kontrolü dışında kalan faktörlerden kaynaklanan eşitsizlikleri gidermek amacıyla geliştirdiği adalet ilkelerinin nasıl tasarlandığını araştırmaktadır. Rawls'un teorisinin merkezinde yer alan fark ilkesi ve fırsat eşitliği ilkesi, sosyal ve ekonomik eşitsizliklerin, yalnızca en dezavantajlıların yararına olduğu ve herkese erişilebilir olduğu koşullarda haklı görülebileceğini savunur. Makale, Rawls'un ilkelerinin modern bağlamlardaki uygulanabilirliğini araştırarak, bu ilkelerin günümüz eşitsizlik ve sosyal adalet sorunlarını çözmedeki etkililiğini ve uygulanabilirliğini değerlendirmektedir. Aynı zamanda, Rawls'un yaklaşımına yönelik çeşitli eleştirileri ele alarak, teorisinin pratik olup olmadığını ve gerçek dünyadaki sorunlara yeterli çözümler sunup sunmadığını tartışmaktadır. Alternatif teoriler ve bakış açılarını inceleyerek, makale Rawls'un çalışmalarının siyaset felsefesi, sosyal politika ve kamu tartışmaları üzerindeki teorik ve pratik etkisini değerlendirmektedir. Bu kapsamlı analiz aracılığıyla, çalışmanın amacı, Rawls'un teorisinin ahlaki keyfiliği ele alma konusundaki güçlü ve zayıf yönlerini ortaya koymak ve adalet, eşitlik ve teorik çerçevelerin kamu politikalarının şekillendirilmesindeki rolü üzerine devam eden tartışmalara katkıda bulunmaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Adalet, Hakkaniyet, Yeniden Dağıtım, Cehalet Perdesi, Eşitsizlik, Keyfilik

John Rawls Approach Toward Fair Redistribution of Resources

Öz

John Rawls' theory of justice has profoundly influenced contemporary political philosophy, particularly through his critique of moral arbitrariness. This article explores Rawls' conceptualization of moral arbitrariness and examines how his principles of justice are designed to address inequalities that arise from factors beyond individual control. Central to Rawls' theory are the difference principle and the principle of fair equality of opportunity, which aim to rectify social and economic disparities by ensuring that inequalities are justified only under conditions that benefit the least advantaged and are accessible to all. The paper investigates the application of Rawls' principles in modern contexts, evaluating their effectiveness and feasibility in addressing contemporary issues of inequality and social justice. It also critically engages with various criticisms of Rawls' approach, considering whether his theory is practical and whether it offers sufficient solutions to real-world problems. By examining alternative theories and perspectives, the article assesses the theoretical and practical impact of Rawls' work on political philosophy, social policy, and public discourse. Through a comprehensive analysis, this study aims to elucidate the strengths and limitations of Rawls' theory in addressing moral arbitrariness and to contribute to ongoing debates about justice, equality, and the role of theoretical frameworks in shaping public policy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Justice, Fairness, Redistribution, Veil of Ignorance, Inequality, Arbitrarıness

Kaynakça

• Bankovsky, M. (2012). Perfecting justice in Rawls, Habermas and Honneth: A deconstructive perspective. Bloomsbury Publishing.
• Bird, A. (1996). Squaring the circle: Hobbes on philosophy and geometry. Journal of the History of Ideas, 57(2), 217–231.
• Botti, D. (2019). John Rawls and American pragmatism: Between engagement and avoidance. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Castiglione, D., Charvet, J., Coole, D., & Forsyth, M. (1995). The social contract from Hobbes to Rawls.
• Elliot, K. (2013). Confronting the Eradication of Poverty through Cosmopolitan Notions of Global Responsibility. Warwick Student L. Rev., 3, 1.
• Fazl, M. (2020). Three Considerations on Rawls’ Original Position.
• Fremantle, S. P. (2016). Reconstructing Rawls: A utilitarian critique of Rawls’s theory of justice.
• Graham, P. (2015). Rawls: A Beginner’s Guide. Simon and Schuster.
• Green, P. (1985). Equality since Rawls: Objective philosophers, subjective citizens, and rational choice. The Journal of Politics, 47(3), 970–997.
• Hampton, J. (1980). Contracts and choices: Does Rawls have a social contract theory? The Journal of Philosophy, 77(6), 315–338.
• Hoover, K. D. (2021). First principles, fallibilism, and economics. Synthese, 198(Suppl 14), 3309–3327.
• Koller, P. (2013). The principles of justice. In John Rawls, a theory of justice (pp. 37–56). Brill.
• Mandle, J. (2009). Rawls’s’ A theory of justice’: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
• Metz, T. (2000). Arbitrariness, justice, and respect. Social Theory and Practice, 26(1), 25–45.
• Mill, J. S. (1998). On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford University Press.
• Miller, F. D. (1995). Nature, justice, and rights in Aristotle’s Politics. Clarendon Press.
• Murphy, J. B. (1992). The workmanship ideal: A theologico-political chimera? Political Theory, 20(2), 319–326.
• Nagel, T. (1973). Rawls on justice. The Philosophical Review, 220–234.
• Nelson, E. (2019). The theology of liberalism: Political philosophy and the justice of God. Belknap Press.
• Nielsen, K. (1991). Rawls and the Socratic Ideal. Analyse & Kritik, 13(1), 67–93.
• Oakley, F., & Urdang, E. W. (1966). Locke, Natural Law, and God. Nat. LF, 11, 92.
• Pogge, T. (1989). Realizing rawls. Cornell University Press.
• Pogge, T. (1998). The categorical imperative. Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: Critical Essays, 189–213.
• Rawls, J. (1968). Distributive justice: Some addenda. 13(1), 51–71.
• Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice (Revised Edition). Harvard University Cambridge, MA.
• Rawls, J. (1982). The basic liberties and their priority. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 3, 3–87.
• Rawls, J. (1989). The domain of the political and overlapping consensus. NYUL Rev., 64, 233.
• Rawls, J. (2020). Political liberalism. In The New Social Theory Reader (pp. 123–128). Routledge.
• Scanlon Jr, T. M. (1972). Rawls’ Theroy of Justice. U. Pa. L. Rev., 121, 1020.
• Stein, M. S. (1997). Rawls on Redistribution to the Disabled. Geo. Mason L. Rev., 6, 997.
• Stier, M. (n.d.). Three Ends and a Beginning.
• Taylor, H. (2017). Rawls’ Difference Principle: A test for social justice in contemporary social policy.
• Tremain, S. (1996). Dworkin on disablement and resources. Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence, 9(2), 343–359.
• Van Der Schaar, M. (2012). Locke on Judgement and Religious Toleration. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 20(1), 41–68.
• Van Parijs, P. (2003). Difference principles. Citeseer.
• Vanberg, V. (1994). Social contract theory. In The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics. Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Waldron, J. (2004). Property and ownership.
• Yılmaz, E. (2016). Resources versus capabilities in social justice. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 28(2), 230–254.