Philosophy › Contemporary
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
1921–2002· Philosopher· Politics, society & justice
Well documentedSolid records, texts or physical evidence.
Harvard philosopher whose A Theory of Justice (1971) argued for principles of fairness chosen as if we did not know our place in society.
See it on the Philosophy map →The idea
Idea: justice is fairness, the rules free and equal people would agree to under fair conditions. Rawls, a World War II veteran who taught at Harvard from 1962, imagined an 'original position' behind a veil of ignorance. He argued people would choose two principles: equal basic liberties for all; and inequalities only with fair equality of opportunity and only if they benefit the least advantaged (the 'difference principle'). Main objection: Nozick said it ignores how holdings arose; communitarians, that it pictures selves without communities.
Why it matters
It revived political philosophy in the English-speaking world and remains the main reference point for debates on fairness, inequality and the welfare state.
Legacy and sources
A Theory of Justice (1971, revised 1999), Political Liberalism (1993) and his published Harvard lectures. He received the National Humanities Medal in 1999.
Still debated
Whether the difference principle requires a welfare state or, as Rawls later argued, a 'property-owning democracy', and whether it applies globally, remain open.
Inside this (4)
Connections (7)
▸The social contract was revived by John Rawls, A Theory of JusticeWell documented
The connection
Rawls said his aim was to carry 'to a higher level of abstraction the familiar theory of the social contract' of Locke, Rousseau and Kant. Instead of a deal to escape a state of nature, his original position is a hypothetical agreement under fair conditions, used to test principles of justice.
When and how
A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, 1971), section 3; first sketched in his 1958 paper 'Justice as Fairness'.
How we know
Rawls states the aim in the book's preface and opening chapter, and his work set off a wider revival of contract theories, such as T. M. Scanlon's contractualism.
Debates and open questions
Critics ask whether a hypothetical contract binds anyone; as Ronald Dworkin put it, 'a hypothetical contract is not simply a pale form of an actual contract; it is no contract at all.'
▸The categorical imperative inspired John Rawls, A Theory of JusticeWell documented
The connection
Kant held that moral rules must be ones every rational person could will, treating each person as an end, never merely as a means. Rawls built that respect into his theory: the veil of ignorance forces impartial choice, and he called the original position a 'procedural interpretation' of Kant's idea of autonomy.
When and how
A Theory of Justice (1971), section 40, 'The Kantian Interpretation of Justice as Fairness'; developed in his 1980 Dewey Lectures, 'Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory'.
How we know
Rawls says so explicitly in section 40, and he taught Kant's ethics at Harvard for decades; those lectures were published as Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy (2000).
Debates and open questions
Some Kant scholars say Rawls used a thinned-out Kant, swapping pure reason for rational choice behind the veil; Rawls later presented his theory as political rather than Kantian at root.
▸On Liberty and the harm principle shaped the liberalism of John Rawls, A Theory of JusticeMostly agreed
The connection
Mill defended wide personal freedom, limited only by harm to others. Rawls's first principle gives priority to equal basic liberties, such as speech, conscience and association, which cannot be traded away for economic gain. Rawls shared Mill's liberal aims but rejected his utilitarian grounding, arguing liberty needs a firmer basis than total welfare.
When and how
On Liberty (1859) and A Theory of Justice (1971); Rawls's Harvard lectures on Mill appear in Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy (2007).
How sure are we?
Rawls discusses Mill's arguments for liberty in the book and his lectures, but much of his liberalism came from Kant and the contract tradition, so the link is real but partial.
Debates and open questions
Whether Rawls' priority of liberty is better grounded than Mill's, and whether Mill's defense of liberty is truly utilitarian, are both debated.
▸John Rawls, A Theory of Justice introduced The veil of ignoranceWell documented
The connection
Rawls needed to make the social contract fair: people who know they are rich would choose rules favoring the rich. So he put the contracting parties behind a veil of ignorance that hides their own position, so that self-interest and impartiality point the same way.
When and how
A Theory of Justice (1971), section 24; an early version appears in 'Justice as Fairness' (1958). The economist John Harsanyi had used a similar device in 1953 and 1955.
How we know
Rawls names and explains the device in the book itself, and returns to it in Political Liberalism (1993) and Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (2001).
Debates and open questions
Harsanyi's earlier version reached utilitarian conclusions, so who deserves credit, and which conclusion the device really supports, are still argued.
▸John Rawls, A Theory of Justice was challenged by Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and UtopiaWell documented
The connection
Nozick, Rawls's Harvard colleague, argued that Rawls treated wealth as if it fell like 'manna from heaven', ready to be divided by a pattern, ignoring that people produce and own it. Justice depends on history, how holdings were acquired and transferred, not on end patterns such as helping the worst-off.
When and how
Harvard's philosophy department; Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), chapter 7, devotes roughly fifty pages to Rawls.
How we know
Nozick addresses Rawls by name at length, and the pairing became standard in political philosophy courses.
Debates and open questions
Whether Nozick's history-based view can work without a fair starting point, given conquest and theft in the past, is a central and unresolved objection.
▸John Rawls, A Theory of Justice was criticized by MacIntyre, Sandel and the communitariansWell documented
The connection
Sandel argued that Rawls's parties behind the veil are 'unencumbered selves' without community ties, yet real people are partly made by family, faith and nation. MacIntyre and Taylor added that liberal neutrality about the good life is itself a contested view, not a neutral starting point.
When and how
Sandel, at Harvard, in Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (1982); MacIntyre's After Virtue (1981); Taylor and Walzer through the 1980s.
How we know
Sandel's book is a sustained critique of Rawls by name, and Rawls responded in 'Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical' (1985) and Political Liberalism (1993).
Debates and open questions
Rawls said his theory never claimed people are unencumbered; whether the critics hit the real target or a caricature is debated.
▸John Rawls, A Theory of Justice was critiqued and extended by The capabilities approach (Sen and Nussbaum)Well documented
The connection
Rawls measured who is worst off by 'primary goods' such as income, rights and opportunities. Sen argued that goods matter only for what they let people do: a disabled person needs more resources for the same freedom. The capabilities approach kept Rawls's concern for the worst-off but changed what is measured.
When and how
Sen's Tanner Lecture 'Equality of What?', Stanford, May 1979; Martha Nussbaum developed her version through the 1980s and 1990s.
How we know
Sen addresses Rawls directly, and Rawls replied in Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (2001), arguing that primary goods could absorb the concern.
Debates and open questions
Rawls argued primary goods are easier to measure publicly; whether capabilities are too vague to guide policy is still discussed.