Philosophy Questions (Essay Sample)

Philosophy questions
Name
Instructor
Task
Date
Question 1:
The Original position is described as a theoretical situation created by John Rawls. According to the Original position, the parties choose ideologies that will govern the fundamental structure of the society in which they live. The selection is made based on a veil of ignorance that would deprive partakers of information regarding their certain features: their ethnicity, sex, social status, and significantly, Conception of the Good. This compels the partakers to choose principles fairly and rationally. The Conception of the Good refers to people’s perceptions of leading a good life.
Question 2:
Rawls’s principle of justice involves the adaptation of two basic principles of justice that would assure a just and morally acceptable society. The first principle is liberty the guarantees the right of every individual to have the best fundamental liberty harmonious with other people’s liberty. The second principle is concerned with wealth, which argues that social and economic status are to be set such that the greatest benefit is gained by the least disadvantaged. Also, social and economic positions need to be open to all under circumstances of equality. The least advantaged persons are typical members of any recognizable group such as women, Haiti Citizens, the poor, high school students amongst other groupings. Rawls argues that in any setting in which each characteristic group gains equally and fairly is efficient. In addition, in order for any transformation to be accepted as a development, it has to benefit the least privileged representative person.
Question 3a:
The AA case attached is concerned with the social and economic positions as enshrined in the principle of justice. According to Rawls, it would not be fair or just for a large corporation with hundreds of employees to have only 10 percent women employees and 10 percent minority employees. It violates Rawls’s principle of justice that argues that social and economic status is to be set such that the greatest benefit is gained by the least disadvantaged. When the company adopts the AA program to increase the number of women and minorities, it conforms to Rawls’s principle arguing that in order for any transformation to be accepted as a development, it has to benefit the least privileged representative persons. Women and minority job candidates are given additional points simply because they are women or minorities. However, the fact that White men are not given any extra points indicates that they are not given equal opportunities, which is against the principle of wealth distribution as stated by Rawls (Werhane, 135).
Question 3b:
To some extent the argument of Rawls is valid since justly the underprivileged should be given more opportunities to boost their social and economic status. Consequently, the society would be a better place to live in. However, even though the underprivileged representative group deserves more opportunities, it should be implemented in a manner that is fair for all. For instance, denying job opportunities to a better qualified candidate and offering it to the less fortunate simply because of their status do not comply with principles of justice.
Question 4:
Nozick’s principles of justice are historical in nature. It argues that fair distribution of goods or resources can be determined by assessing its history. If goods were obtained and given out rightfully, then the consequential distribution of goods is fair and just. However, if they were never acquired and transferred lawfully, then it is necessary to analyze if the injustice was corrected in line with the third principle. If this is true, then the subsequent distribution is just, the reverse is also true.
Question 5:
According to Nozick, all humans have equal human rights regardless of social status, age, ethnicity, gender or background. He classifies human rights into two categories: negative and positive rights. Nozick clarifies that negative rights are the rights against interference. If an individual has negative right, then other people must obey his or her freedom to exercise that right. If a person has a right, others have obligation against interfering with the exercise of that right. Negative rights help not only in protecting the sovereignty of an individual, but also his or her properties. In contrary, positive rights are rights to get aid or help. If an individual has positive rights, other people are required to offer aid or assistance to him or her. For instance, if a person has a right to work, the state is obliged to provide job. Again, if a person has a right to life, the state must offer healthcare to the person.
Question 6a:
Nozick would be against the AA program that insists on giving extra points to the disadvantaged group since such programs victimize against individuals who do not get ‘plus’. Therefore, AA program would be discriminative in nature according to Nozick. In response to the view of Rawls arguing that white male have partial advantage because they have natural talents and social conditions, Nozick would argue that most of them are blameless and have not caused any violation to anybody’s rights to acquire their inherent talents and social advantages. If while males are blameless, then AA program treats them as a means of assisting others, which is against the Kantian principles of justice to treat people as ends not means. If an individual violates another person’s rights, then the offender have to compensate the individual violated. However, AA program makes all group members to compensate rather than the individual who discriminate.
Question 6b:
I agree with Nozick argument since when an individual has a natural talent and social advantage he or she must not be discriminated against. A just system should offer equal opportunities to everybody equitably without an...