AZ Transplant Post-Class

As class finished I found myself wishing it really was an hour longer so we could have completed the thought experiment with Rawls' "original position." Right at the end of class, Nik said something I thought drove right to the heart of Rawls' arguments. He said that where Rawls' methods took you depended on what you wanted the system to accomplish. For Rawls, the ultimate concern was ensuring justice and fairness to the greatest extent possible. But in my view this begs the question, "What is justice? What is fairness?"

Personally, I would (very briefly and not at all comprehensively) define fairness as ensuring a high level of equality of opportunity among the people while retaining a high degree of individual autonomy. It doesn't seem fair to me that kids in the ghetto have to fight such an uphill battle from the time they are born--and this is not just economic, but has to do with their very identity. A poor kid in South Chicago may not even have hope for a better life, because his or her experiences have taught him or her that the middle-class conception of "the good life" is not even possible. Yet, at the same time I respect the argument that people should be granted a wide range of free choice. Just as a person could say that it's unfair for a poor inner-city kid to have so few options, another person could say that it is unfair for a hard-working, successful person to have his or her money taken from them just because his or her peers voted a certain way. Borrowing from de Tocqueville, a tyranny of the majority is still a tyranny.

There is unfairness either way, depending on one's point of view. The question then is, which fairness matters more? In my opinion, although I can empathize with a prosperous business person who has earned their wealth, it is obvious that impoverished people's claim is the greater one. It is much more important to give every child a legitimate chance--a legitimate reason to hope--in this life than it is for an entrepreneur to have a bigger t.v., or even a new car instead of a serviceable used one. Because of the many parties involved, perfect justice will probably not be achieved no matter what happens, but in most cases I think a less-fortunate person's claim for justice even at the expense of a more-fortunate person, is weightier than a more-fortunate person's claim for justice at the expense of the less-fortunate.