The two principles together really envisage a society where none of the social facts about people's backgrounds would actually have a material influence on their chances of success. Did you work out in any way how this could be achievable, or does it remain a sort of idealistic boon? So he does talk about some of what would be involved there. He thinks what we need is a fiscal structure that stops this kind of build up of enormous wealth across generations that turns into unfair levels of advantage from generation to generation. Joe, Wolf, what do we know about the difference principle?
Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss A Theory of Justice by John Rawls (1921 - 2002) which has been called the most influential book in twentieth century political philosophy. It was first published in 1971. Rawls (pictured above) drew on his own experience in WW2 and saw the chance in its aftermath to build a new society, one founded on personal liberty and fair equality of opportunity. While in that just society there could be inequalities, Rawls’ radical idea was that those inequalities must be to the greatest advantage not to the richest but to the worst off.
With
Fabienne Peter
Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warwick
Martin O’Neill
Professor of Political Philosophy at the University of York
And
Jonathan Wolff
The Alfred Landecker Professor of Values and Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford and Fellow of Wolfson College
Producer: Simon Tillotson