thesis
-
Upload
ivanlagarde -
Category
Documents
-
view
7 -
download
0
description
Transcript of thesis
CHAPTER I
1.0 Preliminaries
1.1 Introduction
Every human person wants to be in a just and well-ordered society. A society that
is tranquil, peaceful, orderly, and just. How nice it would be to live in this kind of society.
This is a reality in the life of every human person that cannot be denied. Who wants to be
in a chaotic society? For sure nobody wants to be in this kind of society. However the
quest for justice has not yet ended even up to this time. “We live in a world in search of
justice and we are surprised to find justice already in chains.”1Nowadays many people are
still suffering from injustices social, political, liberal, and economic.
Among those who suffered from injustices were the Filipinos. It is sad to imagine
but is something true for most of them. If there are injustices happening inside the society
it’s a sign that a society is not in proper order. Perhaps there is lacking element why it is
not in order. However it is impossible to call the Philippines as a well-ordered and just
society because of the fact that there are a lot of cases of injustices that is happening until
now. But what are those cases of injustices that make the Philippines as a non-well-
ordered society? Is there any hint?
Looking at the political system of the Philippine society it is democratic.
Although it’s democratic society many Filipinos find difficulty in finding where justice is
particularly the poor. What makes the Philippines not a well-ordered society? It is
because there are many corrupt leaders. This is the reason why the Philippines still
belongs to the third world country. Political and economic issues sprout left and right.
1 Ramon K. Illusario, Crisis and Paradigm: An Inquiry into the Cause of Social Breakdown and A Prescription for Future Resolution ( Manila, Philippines: Multinational Foundation Co.,Inc., 1984) Foreword
2
The Philippines today are facing various problems both politically, socially, and
economically. There are a lot of hints and facts in the Philippine society saying that it is a
non-well-ordered society. If we could still remember there seems to be no end in the war
in Mindanao between the government and the Abu Sayyaf bandits, Filipinos fighting and
killing each other. In fact, the latest news of the terrible massacre of the group of
journalists in Maguindanao by the Ampatuans is a clear manifestation that the Philippines
is not in a well-ordered society. There is no peace, politics is so dirty and corruption is
rampant even in the grassroots.
In addition looking back at the previous problems last 2009, there were the issues
concerning the rice shortage, oil price hike, electricity crisis, and rising unemployment,
the ZTE-NBN scandal, jueteng payola, and fertilizer fund scam. They weres left
unresolved. The issue on the falling income, according to the GDP per capita it shrank to
US$ in 2000 from US$1,29 in 1997 while the GNP per capita contracted to US$1,033
from US$1,97. It is the result of the survey of the Asian Financial Crisis which caught up
in the Philippines in 19198.2The Unequal Regional Development, the Asian Development
Bank (ADB) reported that Metro Manila’s per capita Gross Regional Domestic Product
(GDRP) in 2000 was more twice that than of the national average and more than five
times that of Bicol Region.3There are 5.1 Million Poor families, according to NSO survey
in 2000 and 19.9 percent of families in urban areas and 46.9 in rural areas. The number of
poor families climbed to 5.1 Million, 1.5 million of them in the urban areas and 3.6
million in rural areas. Furthermore 2.5 million families were living in subsistence level.4It
2 http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/social.php ( accessed July 18,2009)
3 Ibid.4 Ibid.
3
means that their income was not enough to buy their basic needs. According to DOLE
10.8 million Filipinos were under employed and 26 percent of College Graduate
according to Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) in 2002, 3.5 Billion Lost
to project anomalies, US$ 53.4 billion foreign debt, Philippines has 2500 Armed Rebels,
and 147 Billion Budget Shortage.5This are the facts that saying that Philippines not a
well-ordered society. There was a lot of budget from the government that was not
distributed properly for the people. Thus this is a kind of injustice among the Filipino
people. According to the Plato’s Republic justice is giving what is owed to the person.6
Thus give what is supposed for a man. However this can be considered as a hint of a non-
well-ordered society because it shows inequality among the people and it’s a kind of
injustice.
The quest for justice among the Filipinos has not yet ended because of so many
social problems that affect their lives. What is the concept of justice for the Filipinos?
Despite the fact that the Philippines is bombarded with social and political issues and
problems in the society however the question is, is there a hope in the Philippine society
to become a well-ordered? However the student researcher would like to suggest means
on the possibility of a well-ordered society in the Philippines. In this context the student-
researcher will try to attempt to apply John Rawls concept of justice to attain the so called
well-ordered society in the Philippines. But how is this concept is applicable? According
to the facts that the student researcher presented most of the issues are pertaining to
5
? Ibid.6
?Plato, Republic, trans. G.M.A.Grube, rev.ed. ( Cambridge:Hacket Publishing Company, Inc,1992 ),7.
4
inequality. Many Filipinos were not much benefitting from the society because of
anomalies among political leaders. The funds that supposed to for them were taken by the
corrupt leaders like the fertilizer scam. For sure those who were affected by this issue will
seek for justice most specially the farmers who are expecting for that fund. What kind of
justice is proper for them? What kind of justice is proper in this case?
According to John Rawls, justice is fairness and it should be the first virtue of the
society.7 But would this concept of justice possible in the Philippines? It can be possible
because Philippines is a democratic country and Rawls conception of justice focused on a
democratic society. Rawls concept of justice is political not metaphysical, because it
focuses only in the society not going beyond.8 However it can be a means and possible to
happened if this concept of justice will be applied. John Rawls concept of justice leads
the Philippines into a well ordered society.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The aim of the student researcher focuses on the study of John Rawls Theory of
Justice on how it could be applied in the Philippines in order to have a well-ordered
society. However to make this work organized the student- researcher will pose a
question that will facilitate to the flow of the discussion. The student-researcher will
focus on the following questions:
1.2.1 What is John Rawls notion of justice?
1.2.2 What is a well-ordered society according to Rawls?
7 John Rawls, Theory of Justice (New York: Harvard University and Oxford Press, 1971), 3.
8
? John Rawls, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement ( Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2001) Editor’s Foreword
5
1.2.3 What is the Filipino concept of justice?
1.2.4 How does John Rawls concept of justice can lead the Philippines into a well-
ordered society?
1.2.5 What makes Rawls concept of Justice applicable in the Philippines?
Moreover these questions will serve as the backbone in the discussion of this paper.
The answers to this question will be discussed by the student-researcher on the body of
this paper.
1.3 Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is to have a clear understanding and good
presentation of John Rawls “concept of justice, and deepen the understanding of the
student-researcher of the notion of “justice” for the Filipinos. This study is important
because it talks about the social problems and hint of a non well-ordered society in the
Philippines. However this paper tries to propose a means relevant to the social problem
facing by the Philippines today. It is the hope of the student researcher to prove in this
paper that John Rawls concept of justice can be a means. Moreover this study lies on the
student-researchers attempt in using Rawls concept that will lead the Philippine society
into a well-ordered society.
1.4 Scope and Delimitation
There are many concepts of justice and it is very broad. However the student-
researcher will be specific in using the concept of justice. Thus he will focus only on
John Rawls concept of Justice. The student researcher will use the works of John Rawls
particularly his book “A Theory of Justice” and “Justice as Fairness”. There will be a
discussion on the notion of justice of the Filipinos and hints of a non-well- ordered
6
society in the Philippines. Moreover the student-researcher will mainly rely on the
question posed on the statement of the problem.
1.5 Procedural Design
The student researcher will be using the descriptive remedial approach. The point
of departure of this paper will begin to the presentation of the first chapter: statement of
the problem, significance of the study, scope and delimitation, procedural design and
review of related literature. In the second chapter the life and works of John Rawls will
be discussed as well as the major influences of John Rawls way of thinking. In the third
chapter, will dwell on John Rawls notion of justice will be elaborated and discussed.
There will be also a discussion on John Rawls concept of a well-ordered society. In the
fourth chapter the notion of justice by the Filipinos will also be discussed. Moreover in
this chapter also the student-researcher will exposed the argument on John Rawls concept
of justice applied in the Philippines. In the fifth chapter the student-researcher will
evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Rawlsian justice then afterwards he will apply it
on the Philippine context. In the last chapter the student-researcher will make the
conclusion.
1.6 Definition of Terms
1.6.1 Justice
7
-as fairness9
-the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought10
1.6.2 Society
-More or less self-sufficient associations of persons who in their relations
to one another recognize certain rules of conduct as binding and who for the most part act
accordance with them.11
1.6.3 Well-ordered Society
-It is a society in which everyone accepts and knows that the others accept
the same principle, and basic social institutions satisfy and are known to satisfy this
principle.12
1.6.4 Equality
-It is a relationship between different people. There is equality when they
are equally supplied with resources, or equally happy.13
1.6.5 Egalitarianism
-It is the view that all humans are equal and should be treated equally in
liberties, rights, respect, and opportunities. 14
1.7 Review of Related Literature
9 John Rawls, Theory of Justice (New York: Harvard University Press and Oxford University Press, 1971), xi.
10 Ibid., 3.
11 Ibid., 4.
12 Ibid., 279.
13 Dennis Mackerlie, “Equality”, Ethics: An International Journal of Social and Legal Philosophy, vol. 1 (January 1996), 274.
14 Harper-Collins Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd s.v. “Egalitarianism”
8
1.7.1 Beauchamp, Tom. Philosophical Ethics: An Introduction to Moral
Philosophy. San Francisco. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1991.
In this book the author stresses the significance of justice on egalitarianism in the
light of John Rawls. However he makes an analysis on the egalitarian theory of Rawls.
He begins his analysis by summarizing, The Role of Justice”, followed by the, “Original
Position and Justification”, “Principle of Justice”, and the Tendency of Equality”.
This book is helpful to the student researcher because it gives a synthesis on how
Rawls concept of justice be easily understand.
1.7.2 Barry, Bryan, “Theory of Justice”, London. Harvester-Wheatsheaf. , 1989
This book uses John Rawls “Theory of Justice” as its framework. Some of the
concepts being used in this book are taken from the other books of Rawls. In this book
the student researcher deepen his understanding about the concept of a well-ordered
society. It can be good reference.
1.7.3 Anderson, Elizabeth, “What is the Point of Equality?” Ethics: An
International Journal of Social and Legal Philosophy. Chicago. University of Chicago
Press., July 2001
In this article Elizabeth Anderson points out what is really the point of equality
for the people and the negative and positive aim of egalitarian justice. For Anderson
egalitarianism is a necessary to have a well-ordered society. With this article the student
researcher understood that egalitarianism is necessary in the society.
1.7.4 Margalit, Avishai, “The Decent Society”, London: Harvard University
Press., 1996
The book contains the concept of what a decent society is. According to the
9
Margalit, “A decent society is one whose in situations does not humiliate people.”15 Thus
for the authors the decent society does not humiliate people itself. In this book being just
is not to humiliate other people. Moreover this book is a good source to deepen the
student researcher’s concept of a just society.
Chapter 2
2.0 General Background
2.1 Life and Works of John Rawls16
John Rawls was a well-known philosopher of the 20th century and largely known
by his Theory of Justice. He was born on February 21, 1921 in Baltimore, Maryland,
15 Avishai Margalit, The Decent Society (London: Harvard University Press., 1998), 1.
16 Samuel Freeman, Rawls (Oxon: Routledge Publication, 2007), 1-8.
10
U.S.A., from a well-to-do Baltimore family. His father is William Lee Rawls, a lawyer
from Eastern North Carolina near Greenville, and his mother Anna Abell Stump Rawls, a
president of the New League of Women Voters in Baltimore. They were five siblings in
the family and all of them are boy and he was the second. Two of his brother died at the
young age. He grew up in Baltimore where his father practiced law. It was also in
Baltimore he attended his first formal schooling. For six years studied in Calvert School
in Baltimore and spent two years at Roland Junior High. Thereafter he transferred to an
Episcopal school for boys in Kent school in Western Connecticut and graduated in 1939.
Then he continued his studies at Princeton University and completes his B.A. in
Philosophy in 1943.
After he graduated at Princeton he joined the U.S. Army in January 1943 and
there he serves as a private in the infantry. Rawls fought in the Pacific together with the
32nd Infantry Division, the “Red Arrow Division”. He spent 36-day battle in Leyte and in
New Guinea and another 120-day battle in Luzon in the Philippines. One of the most
memorable days of Rawls in the war was when he was hit by the bullet of an enemy on
his head while drinking on the stream and it leaves a scar for the rest of his life. Rawls
serve as the radio operator which is one of the most dangerous positions in the battle. He
also witnessed the bombing in Hiroshima Japan. Many friends and classmates of Rawls
were killed on the war. He finished his military service in January 1946.
After he finished his military service, he returned to Princeton University and
continues his studies for his doctorate in Philosophy. In 1949 Rawls successfully
defended his thesis. He wrote his dissertation on “Moral Knowledge and Judgment on the
Moral Worth of Character”, under W.T. Stace, a supervisor of dissertation on Moral
11
worth Moral Knowledge. And at the same year also he married Margaret Warfield of
Philadelphia a graduate from Pembroke College at Brown University. In June 1950,
Rawls received his PhD degree. From 1950 to 1952 he serve as an instructor at Princeton.
Thereafter he went to Fulbright Fellowship at Oxford and there he became a member of
High Table at Christ Church College. It was at Oxford where Rawls was influenced by
H.L.A. Hart on the Philosophy of Law and also attended seminars of Isaiah Berlin
Hampshire. In 1953 he returned to U.S, and thought at Cornell University in Ithaca, New
York and serves as an assistant professor in philosophy. There he joined his former
teacher Norman Malcolm and his former classmates in Princeton and lifelong friend
namely Roger Abirton and David Sachs.
At the age of 34 in 1957, his first book was published, Justice as Fairness. In
1962 his teaching career in Harvard starts. He thought in Harvard for almost 30 years in
fulltime position teaching every year the course “Modern Political Philosophy”. During
his teaching career in Harvard the year after, in 1963 he published “The Sense of
Justice”, which was later developed in the chapter 8 of “Theory of Justice”. Another
work was published, “The Justification of Civil Disobedience”, in 1967 which was later
revised in the “Theory of Justice”. After two years in 1971, his great masterpiece was
published, “Theory of Justice”. This masterpiece of Rawls contains his famous account
on the “Original Position”, “Veil of Ignorance”, Equal Basic Liberties”, and Difference
Principle”. The “Theory of Justice” was translated into 30 different languages and sell
over half million copies. A year after the publication of his great work in 1972, he was
awarded the,” Phi Beta Kappa Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize”. From 1970 to 1974 Rawls
was a chairman of Harvard Philosophy Department and a President of the American
12
Philosophical Association, Eastern Division. In 1980 he gave a lecture on “Kantian
Constructivism in Moral Theory”, where he presents 3 Dewey lecture at Colombia
University. On the following year in 1981, he gave another lecture on, “The Basic
Liberties and their Priority”, where presents the “Tanner Lecture “, at the University of
Michigan.
In 1981, “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical” was published and
followed by “The Idea of Overlapping Consensus” after six years in 1987 and “Themes
in Kant’s Moral Philosophy” in 1989. Rawls retired from full-time position in 1991 at
Harvard. He thought in Harvard for 30 years. However his retirement has never become
the hindrance to continue his teaching career. After his retirement Rawls still teach until
1995 teaching the same course Modern Political Philosophy. In 1993 was “Political
Liberalism”. For the first time in October 1995 Rawls experienced his first mild stroke.
Due to this Rawls formally retired from teaching but he never stop in writing and giving
lectures. “The Idea of Public Reason” was published in 1997, then after two years,” The
Law of Peoples”, and the revised of “A Theory of Justice” was published in 1999. At the
same year Rawls was awarded a National Humanities Medal by President Clinton, and
also Rolf Shock Prize in Logic and Philosophy. In 2002 “Justice as Fairness: A
Restatement” was published. At the age of 81 on November 20, 2002 Rawls died
peacefully at home in Lexington, Massachusetts. Rawls was buried in Mt. Auburn
Cemetery, Cambridge, Massachusetts. After his sudden death five years later his
“Lectures on the History Philosophy” with lectures on Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Rousseau,
Mill, Marx, Sidgwick, and Butler was published in 2007.
13
2.2 Major Influences to Rawls Line of Thought17
Rawls was greatly influenced by the past great thinkers both in moral and political
philosophy. However it was Rousseau’s “Social Contract” that inspired Rawls of his
doctrine on the “Original Position “and on the other hand “The Convention of Justice was
of David Hume. In political Philosophy during his time in Princeton, he was influenced
and thought by the Wittgenstein’s student and philosopher of language Norman Malcom.
Moreover he was also influenced of his thesis supervisor, the Hegel scholar W.T. Stace.
Rawls was profoundly influenced by Kant. “From the idea of “the priority of right
over the good” and the Kantian interpretation of justice as fairness in A Theory of Justice,
to Kantian (and later Political) Constructivism and the personality and the distinction
between the Reasonable and Rational in Political Liberalism, and finally the rejection of
a world state and the idea of “realistic utopia” in Rawls’s Law of Peoples. One can
discern that many of Rawls main ideas were deeply influenced by his understanding of
Kant.”18Rawls interpretation of his conception of justice is grounded of Kant’s idea of
respect for person. The initial drafts of A Theory of Justice Kant had a little direct
influence in 1950s and 1960s. “The Law of Peoples” was inspired by Kant’s writings on
international justice.
Another great thinker to influence Rawls is Sidgwick. “Like Sedgwick’s criteria
for a rational method, the original position is designed to incorporate “all relevant
requirements of practical reason, (PL, 90) so that it may serve as a method of selection to
decide upon the most reasonable conception of justice from among array of
17 Ibid ., 12-28.
18 Ibid., 21.
14
alternatives.”19Moreover Rawls follow also Sedgwick’s Intuitionism and perfectionism
among the methods of ethics that is compared to utilitarianism. Furthermore, in writing
out the ideas of Theory of Justice, Hegel had a little direct influence also to Rawls. Like
Hegel, Rawls rejects the dualisms that are implicit in Kant’s transcendental philosophy.
Chapter 3
John Rawls Notion of Justice
3.1 Justice as Fairness
Justice as fairness, this is the concept of justice presented by John Rawls in his
masterpiece A Theory of Justice. But one must need to understand why justice is
conceived as fairness. What is its basis?
19 Ibid., 24.
15
“According to justice as fairness, the most reasonable principle of justice is those
that would object of mutual agreement by person under fair conditions. Justice as fairness
thus develops a theory of justice from the idea of social contract. The principles it
articulates affirm broadly liberal conception of basic rights and liberties, and only permit
inequalities in wealth and income that would be to the advantage of the least well-off.20
Justice is the most reasonable principle in this context. However it is understood
why Rawls conception of justice as fairness for the reason that in every society it cannot
be deny the fact there were always group of people who are under unfair condition.
Rawls concept on justice is basically focused on the basic rights and liberties and
inequality is permissible only on the level of wealth and income. It can be also
understood here that the conception of justice as fairness was developed from the idea of
the social contract.
More over justice as fairness is a political concept and not metaphysical.21 Thus
Rawls conception of justice is best understood in a political concept. It is political
because it only focuses on the society and not going beyond. For further understanding of
Rawls concept of justice the student researcher will discuss on the next discussion his two
principles of justice.
3.2 The Two Principles of Justice
John Rawls conception of Justice is articulated into two principles. These are the
principle of liberty and the difference principle. This is the most important part in
understanding Rawls concept of justice.
20 John Rawls , Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, edited by Erin Kelly, (London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2001), xi
21 Ibid.
16
3.2.1 Principle of Liberty
“Each person has is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal
basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties of others.”22
This is the first principle of Rawls notion of justice. It is primarily designed for
the social and economic institutions and ascribes the equal rights and liberties of all
citizens in the society. Moreover this principle stresses the significance or value of the
right and liberty of every person. When Rawls speaks of liberty he is referring
particularly from liberty of conscience, freedom of association, freedom of speech,
freedom of thought, freedom of the person including freedom of psychological
oppression, physical assault, disembarrassment or integrity of the person, the rights to
hold personal property, the rights to vote and freedom from arbitrary arrest in accordance
with the rule of the law.23 In this context it could easily be understood what principle of
liberty of Rawls is trying to say about. Moreover, the principle of liberty is not
reasonably require the unqualified granting of total liberty to each individual yet the
liberty must be constrained by the need to protect the liberty of each individual, hence a
more refined principle is adopted saying that, “each person is to have an equal right to the
most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of
liberty to all”. 24 Liberty is very important to every citizen. It is the basis if a citizen
where fully recognized in the society. Most people who find least in liberty have the
22 Rawls, A Theory of Justice, 53.
23 Ibid.
24 Samuel Gorovitz, “John Rawls: A Theory of Justice”, Contemporary Political Philosophers, edited by Anthony de Cerspigny and Kenneth Minogue (New York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1975), 280.
17
possibility to revolt against the society. Liberty is the voice of the people in the society.
Without liberty man finds himself as an outcast in the society. In this principle basic
rights and liberty is the first priority.
3.2.2 The Difference Principle
“Social and economic inequalities are to arranged so that they are both (a)
reasonably expected to be everyone’s advantage, and (b) attached to positions and
offices open to all.”25 This principle is meant to be the greatest benefit of the least
advantage of the society. However this principle has two parts. The first part is
“reasonably expected to everyone’s advantage or the so called fair opportunity.”26
It requires that all citizens having the same talent and willingness to use them to
have the same education and economic opportunities regardless whether they are born
poor or rich.27 It means that those persons who have skills in different kinds of work must
need to teach the illiterate in order to have the same skill with them. For example, the
ability to write and read, not all has the ability to write and read. In order for them to
learn how to read and write they need a teacher to teach. In sharing ones’ knowledge
someone must be generous enough in sharing all the knowledge one has and this
generous sharer must be the teacher, a competitive authority. Obviously, the students are
the receiver of knowledge shared by the teacher. Every human person is part of the
society. Being part of the society he has the right to learn and be educated in the society
because this includes on the basic rights of every citizen.
25
? Ibid.
26 Ibid.27 http://plato.stanford.edu.edu/entries/rawls (Accessed November 11, 2009)
18
Moreover, the second part of the second principle is “attached to positions and
offices open to all.”28This second part speaks of the arrangement of social institutions in
order for inequalities and income work to the advantage worst off.29 In this part inequality
is permissible for the reason that wealth and income depends on the skill of every person.
Similarly, all the members of soccer team for example, the privilege of being in the team.
However, within this team each individual player has their own distinctive function for
the proper organization of the team when they are in game. A striker for example cannot
be a defender at the same time. The role of the striker should not go over the boundaries
of his part in order for him to focus on his job as a striker and let also the defender fulfill
his task as a defender. In this analogy it is understood that every member of the team
enjoy and have the privilege to play but each individual have its own position. Similarly
in the society each individual has the privilege to work in the society but the income or
wages of every individual is not the same because of the fact that their wages depends on
their work. In this principle it is understood how important to be attached in any
opportunities that can be find in the society. The privilege to be employed in social
institutions is not only for the rich and the middle class in the society but it’s for
everybody.
.3.2 Justice as First Virtue of Social Institutions
Virtue is intrinsically in the mind of man. So much so he always seeks and desires
the good. Justice in the words of Rawls is the key element in achieving social justice
system, in his book A Theory of Justice he said, Justice is the first virtue of social
28 Ibid 29
? Ibid.
19
institutions, as truths is of systems of thought.”30Thus it is the virtue mothering of all
other virtues in the society. Implicitly Rawls would like to say that justice is never
learned just by reading it but rather it is learned by doing and applying it. So much so that
in a society in order to judge it as just society the equal citizenship must be settled. As
John Rawls puts it:
Throughout I considered only as virtue of social institution, or what shall call practice. The principles of justice are regarded as formulating restrictions as to how practices may define positions and offices and assign thereto powers and liabilities, rights and duties. Justice as a virtue of particular actions of person I do not take up it all. It is important to distinguish these various subject of justice, since the meaning of the concept varies according to whether it’s applied to practices, particular actions, or person. These meanings are indeed, connected but they are not identical. I shall confine my discussion to the sense of justice as applied to practices, since this sense is the basic one. Once it is understood, the other senses should go quietly easy. 31
Moreover justice plays a very important role in every social institution. It is
however established for the common good of every people living and working inside the
society. So much so for a man who loves his virtue he will always practice it in order to
become a person he wants to be. It is similar also to the society justice as the first virtue
as Rawls would call it must be practiced in every social institution in order for it to
become a just society.
3.3 Subject of Justice
In this section the researcher will present the subject of justice which is one of the
necessary elements in this study. Justice can be applied in different aspects of life.
Further, people have different interpretation and understanding of it. However, in this
30 Rawls, A Theory of Justice,3
31 Robert C. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings (New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997), 617-618.
20
case the subject of justice that the researcher is referring is the basic structure of the
society. John Rawls believes that the subject of justice is the basic structure of the
society as he puts it:
The basic structure of society consists of the arrangement of the political, social, and economic institutions that make social cooperation possible and productive. These institutions have a profound influence on individuals’ everyday lives, their characters, desires, and ambitions, as well as their future prospects. The basic institutions that are part of the basic structure include, first, the political constitution and the resulting from of government and legal system that it supports, including the system of trials and other legal procedures; second, the system of property, whether public or private, that must exist in any society to specify who has exclusive rights to and responsibilities for the use of goods and resources. The system of property specifies the rights, powers, and duties that individuals and groups have with respect to the use and enjoyment of resources and other thing; third, the system of markets and other means of transfer and disposal of economic goods, and more generally the structure and norms of the economic system of production, transfer, and distribution of goods and resources among individuals; and fourth, the family in some form which from a political perspective is the primary mechanism any society must have for the raising and education of children and thus the reproduction of society overtime.32
The subject of justice is primarily the rights of every people and the basic structure of the
society. The reason why the subject of justice is the basic structure of the society is
because justice according to Rawls has a profound effect in the society.33 Thus justice in
this way must always apply in every structure of social institution of the society. The
entire focus of justice is basically on the political and social justice. Moreover Rawls
conception of justice starts from the special case of basic structure.34 Since it begins from
the special case of basic structure it became the subject of his conception his concept of
justice.
32 Freeman, Rawls, 101.
33 Ibid., 7
34 Rawls, Justice as Fairness, 10.
21
3.4 Rawls view on a Well-ordered Society
Rawls viewed society as “more or less self-sufficient associations of persons who
in their relations to one another recognize certain rules of conduct as binding and who for
the most part act accordance with them.”35 A well-ordered is an ideal society for every
human person. However Rawls has his own view of what a well-ordered society is.
Rawls characterized well-ordered “as one design to advance the good of its members and
effectively regulated by a public conception of justice. Thus it is a society in which
everyone accepts and knows that the others accept the same principles of justice, and the
basic social institutions satisfy and are known to satisfy these principles.”36This is how
Rawls viewed and characterized what a well-ordered society is. Moreover this concept on
view of Rawls of a well-ordered society is very egalitarian, because the basis of justice
practically pertains on the equality of all citizens in the society.
It is evident that Rawls conception of justice is framed in this idea of a well-
ordered society. So much so Rawls conception of justice must be justified by the
condition of human life.37 A well ordered-society according to Rawls is regulated by its
public conception of justice. Since it is regulated by its public condition people got the
courage desire in the society as what did the principle required.38 With the two principle
of justice presented by Rawls it is understood that man should be treated equally in the
society according to their basic rights. In a well-ordered society this kind of treatment is
35 Rawls , Theory of Justice, 1136
? Ibid., 397.
37 Ibid.
38 Ibid., 397-398
22
practiced. However for further understanding of Rawls concept of a well-ordered society
on the next discussion egalitarianism will be discussed on the next section.
3.4.1 Egalitarianism
Egalitarianism is one of the most important elements in Rawls view of a well-
ordered. To understand more Rawls view on a well-ordered society it is necessary to
understand what egalitarianism is. “Egalitarianism, the view that all men and women are
equally just by virtue of their being human is a position that must be urged and is not a
”natural” state affairs or a belief that was always accepted by everyone.”39Thus
egalitarianism basically lies on the concept of equality. These concepts basically advocate
the equality between men and women. Sometimes people always say that men cannot be
equated to women. It is because the first impressions to women are weak. However this
concept argues that men and women are equal and the only thing that makes man distinct
from one another is on the gender.
Egalitarianism is powerfully represented in John Rawls view of a well-ordered
society. Indeed a society that used to practice egalitarianism can be called as well-ordered
society. Because of the mentality that everybody is counted as one, and thus, no
discrimination between men and women. Moreover egalitarianism or equality is a
relationship between people.40 A person finds justice in equality because they feel that
they are counted as one. So much so people are happy when they know that there is no
discrimination and equally treated in the society.
3.4.2 Egalitarian Society
39 Robert C. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings (New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997),607.
40 Mackerlie, Equality, 274.
23
Rawls view on a well-ordered society can be characterized as an egalitarian
society. However since the concept of egalitarianism was already discuss before
proceeding to this discussion it would be easy then to understood what an egalitarian
society is. An egalitarian society based its concept of justice on the equality of each
person inside the society. Thus it is understood that each person is treated with equal
respect both men and women there is no discrimination. Moreover an egalitarian society
ought to be understood a complete equality among each member of the society or as
raging over a person’s life as a whole.41 So much so an egalitarian society stresses the
significance of the concept of social justice of equal treatment of people in the society.
Indeed an egalitarian society is a picture of a well-ordered society. It is the idea of society
was people find justice through equal treatment and satisfaction.
Furthermore in an egalitarian society it always aims for equality to men.
Moreover in an egalitarian society inequality is not bad but it is unfair.42 It is unfair say
for example that there are goods to be distributed to the people and it was not distributed
equally. In this case there is a possibility that it would create conflict among people in
the sense that other would get envy others because of what they have received and for
sure they will compare the goods that they received from one another. However men are
happy when they are equally supplied with equal resources.43 This is however the basis of
41
? Kai Nielsen, Equality and Liberty: A Defense of Radical Egalitarianism (United States of America: Rowman and Allanheld Publishers, 1985),46.
42 Mackerlie, Equality, 275
43 Ibid.,274.
24
justice in an egalitarian society. Moreover this idea of society can be seen in Rawls
concept of a well-ordered society because every individual is counted as one.
Chapter 4
4.0 On Philippine Context
4.1 The Filipino notion of Justice
Peoples have different understanding and different interpretation of what justice
is. Hence, Filipinos have its own understanding of it. Thus, it is not surprising that
Filipinos have its own notion of justice. This section will present how Filipinos
understands and interprets what justice is.
4.1.1 Freedom
According to history there were three foreigners who invaded the Philippines.
These were the Spaniards, the Americans and the Japanese. Going back to the time of the
Spaniards they stayed in the Philippines for almost three hundred years. Spaniards arrived
in the Philippines in 1565. The purpose of the Spaniards is to colonize the Philippines to
25
increase their colony in Southeast Asia, spread Christianity and introduce European
civilization.44
During the Spanish period Filipinos were caught in a great dilemma. Filipinos
suffered so much in the hands of the Spaniards. Spaniards has taken the freedom of the
Filipinos to live freely in his own native land. They were even mocked and called as an
“Indio”45. Jose Rizal, the national hero of the Filipinos known for his quotation, “Walang
alipin Kung walang magpapaalipin”.46 In this quotation Rizal is trying to express his
feelings about freedom for one’s own land. It is because during the Spanish period.
freedom is obscure for the Filipinos. When the Filipinos tried and started the revolution
against the Spaniards blood flowed and many died. However, after 332 years the
Filipinos successfully escape from the chain of the Spaniards. However, it’s not yet the
end of the quest for freedom because another colonizer came, the Japanese. The concept
of justice during the Spanish period, were almost the same. Freedom is still. During the
Japanese period Filipinos were humiliated and it seems that freedom is obscure once
again. It is a remarkable event during the great battle in Bataan and Corregidor and the
Death March. There were about 76,000 men imprisoned during war. Many died because
they were sick, hungry and wounded. Prisoners walked for almost eighty kilometers and
many died along the way.47 Because of the desire of Japan to colonize Philippines many
44Beinvenido Lumbera and Cynthia Nograles-Lumbera, Philippine Literature: A History and Anthropology (Metro Manila: National, Book Store, Inc., 1982), 31. 45
? The term “Indio” is used by the Spaniards to the Filipinos which means slave. 46
? http://www.joserizal.ph/fi09.html. (Accessed January 11, 2010). 47 Monina A. Mercado, Great Filipino Battles (Parañaque Metro Manila: The
Philippine Alliance Corporation-1979), 75.
26
died of the war. However, peace in the country can also be another concept of justice for
the Filipinos. In this particular event we could see how Filipinos protect their land and
they really seek for freedom. For Filipinos freedom is very important because this is the
sign of a non humiliating society.
4.1.2 Liberty
Liberty is one of the most important aspects in every Filipino citizen. Depravation
of one’s liberty is a kind of injustice to the Filipinos. Accordingly the textbook of the
Philippine Constitution in Article III, Bill of rights Section 1 states that, “no person shall
be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of laws.”48 In this section it is
clearly understood how liberty is so significant in every individual particularly to the
Filipinos. Liberty is the basic right of every individual person in order to socialize inside
the community or society. It is very important in very Filipino citizen because it is the
basis of they can practice freely their rights in accordance with the law. When a person
experience depravation of liberty, there is a tendency to react or revolt in any other way
around like civil disobedience. This is very true for the Filipinos. Going back to what had
happened in the EDSA Revolution during the time of the Marcos regime many Filipinos
struggled to fight for their liberty in order to attain the justice they are longing for so
long. This is one of the most remarkable events in the Philippine history that shows how
Filipinos was so thirst for liberty due to the fact that their liberty was deprived and not
recognized rightly. It is clearly stated in the Philippine Constitution that depravation of
one’s liberty is against the law. But what did the political leaders do. In this context we
48 Ray S. Naguit, Discourse on the 1987 Philippine Constitution: A textbook on Philippine Constitution and Government (Bulacan, Bulacan: Gintong Sinag Publishing, 2002), 175.
27
can see how liberty was so significance for the Filipinos that even up to death they will
struggle just to attain liberty.
4.1.3 Social Justice
What is social justice? Social justice is a broad idea. Many people interpreted it in
different ways. Every individual has different understanding of it. However, Filipino
people have also their own understanding of social justice. According to Jose W.
Diokno49, in his essay “A Filipino concept of justice” which was published in Solidarity
Magazine in this magazine he presented the best definition of social justice for the
Filipinos. As Diokno puts it:
Social justice, for us Filipinos, means a coherent, intelligible system of law, made known to us, enacted by a legitimate government freely chosen by us, and enforced fairly and equitably by a courageous, honest, impartial, and competent police force, legal profession and judiciary, that: first, respects our rights and our freedoms both as individuals and as a people; second, seeks to repair the injustices that society has inflicted on the poor by eliminating poverty as rapidly as our resources and our ingenuity permit; third, develops a self-directed and self-sustaining economy that distributes its benefits to meet, at first, the basic material needs of all, then to provide an improving standard of living for all, but particularly for the lower income groups, with time enough and space to allow them to take part in and enjoy our culture; fourth, changes our institutions and structures, our ways of doing things and relating to each other, so that whatever inequalities remain are not caused by those institutions or structures, unless inequality is needed temporarily to favor the least favored and its cost is borne by the most favored; and fifth, adopts means and processes that are capable of attaining those objectives.50
49 Jose W. Diokno was greatly influenced by American Philosopher John Rawls especially in 50 http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20071215-106988/
A_Filipino_definition_of_social_justice (Accessed December 13, 2009)
28
In this concept of justice presented by Diokno it is quite clear how Filipino people
understand what social justice is. Diokno arrives with this definition of social justice by
observing what is happening in the Philippine society. He will not arrive at this definition
of social justice if he does not experience nor observed that there are lots of social
injustices happening in the country. He was not the only one who defines the meaning of
social justice for the Filipinos yet there are also other Filipinos who define it but they
were left unrecognized since they are not that familiar compare to Diokno. This implies
that Filipino people has their own understanding of social justice based on how they
experience and observe it in their daily life.
4.1.4 Just and Humane Society
What is a just and humane society for the Filipinos? According to the Preamble of
the Philippine Constitution; “We the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of
Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society and establish a government
that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserved and
develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and under the rule of law and regime of
truth, justice freedom love equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this
constitution.”51 The Preamble in the Philippine Constitution advocates a just and Humane
Society. More it carries the structure of society as the basis of justice. It probes that each
citizen is secured by the law to what is written in the constitution. Thus the basis of just
society is seen in a just and humane society.
51 de Leon, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution.
29
Ever human person for sure wants a just and humane society. However for the
Filipinos this structure is what they want to be in the society. It is in this structure of the
society where they find the just society.
4.2 Social issues in the Philippines as Hint of a non well-ordered society
There are lots of social issues that can be considered hint of a non-well-ordered
society in the Philippines. These are some of the issues that hinder the Philippine society
to attain a well ordered society.
4.2.1 Rampant Corruption
Corruption has been a problem in the Philippines for almost several decades
already. Nowadays corruption is becoming more and more rampant. Because of
corruption many Filipino people are suffering from poverty. According to the survey 35
billion pesos lost in project anomalies.52 “The Chairman of the Committee on
Appropriations at the Lower Chamber of the Congress said that the Philippine
Government lost 21 Billion to graft and corruption stemming from scheming contracts
entered into by senators and congressmen in 2001 and the amount of money lost to
corruption involving projects executed by other government officials.”53
It shows the extent of graft and corruption that is happening in the country. It is a
manifestation of how the country and its people are suffering from great loss. This is due
to the fact that every act of corruption leads to the privation of the due amount of benefits
that the people must receive from the government. Proper distribution of the money
sustains government’s projects from health to infrastructure, to livelihood and education,
52
? http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/social.php. (accessed July 18,2009)
53 Ibid.
30
peace and order and, etc. thus, a privation of these funds hinders the proper functioning of
the government and the Filipino society as a whole.
Corruption is only one of the many problems that the Filipino society is
experiencing. But a more particular picture of the problem of the society can be seen
through the situation of its people. According to facts, there are 15 million children who
are malnourished in the Philippines. “In 2002 study conducted by the Philippine
Congress, it showed that the about 15.6 million or more that 60 percent of the 25 million
Filipino children (below 18 years old) were malnourished. In a separate study conducted
by the Food and Nutrition Institute (FNRI), three out of 10 Filipino preschoolers were
found malnourished or underweight in 2001.”54
This sad reality is something that the Filipinos are experiencing. Such reality
mirrors how the people struggle for the quest of survival. However, seeing this fact is
much painful to see with the governments’ corruption at its background.
Moreover, corruption today is becoming endemic in the Philippines. According to
the former president of the CBCP Orlando Quevedo, Filipinos have been suffering for
about six decades but corruption is not as bad as now and even elections for Sanguniang
Kabataan is tainted with corruption. He even said “that is a terrible thing”55 More over he
even received two letters on corruption. The first letter was during the term of President
Corazon Aquino and the latest was during the years in office of President Arroyo.
54
? Ibid.
55 Evelyn Macairan, “Corruption in RP not as bad as now, says ex-CBCP official” The Philippine Star News, 16 January 2009,12.
31
During the eight years in office, President Arroyo and members of his family have been dragged into many corruption related issues such as the $329-million national broadband network-ZTE deal and the P728-million fertilizer fund scam. But Quevedo clarified that “corruption is really endemic in the Philippines .It is (also) not the monopoly of one government. “Quevedo, who is also the secretary general of the Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences (FABC), added that there are other countries experiencing the same problem.In fact, “the documents in the FABC and documents that would come out would mention the corruption is endemic in most governments or countries in Asia and not just the Philippines” he said.56
Corruption is really endemic in the Philippines. It shows the characteristic of a non-
well-ordered society. If only political leaders of the Philippines are not corrupt and
honestly serving in the government perhaps this thing would not happened. As long as
this problem continue to exist in the Philippine government it is really impossible to call
it a well-ordered society. In the Philippines it’s not only corruption that hinders its
progress. There are other social issues to be adhered but what the government did is that
they only show the good to people and they hide the truth.
4.2.2 Corruption Leads to Poverty
Corruption is one of the worst form injustices among the people, particularly in a
nation wherein democracy is being practice. It is a system that is hard to eradicate
especially when it is rooted already in the governmental system. It is a crime against the
nation because it can reach to the extent of little by little killing the people because of
depravation of the basic services and needs of people that must be provided.
One of its worst effects is poverty. According to the fact many Filipinos are
living in poverty line the glimpse of hope seems to be obscure to many of the Filipinos
56
? http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/social.php ( accessed July 18,2009)
32
due to the fact that there is only a very rare opportunity to earn a living that can sustain a
family. Thus, it leads to many crimes that are rampant especially in the streets in Manila
and even in some provinces. People who engage in this kind of activities blamed poverty
because of the main reason why they compel in doing such a crime. The people could not
be blamed. This is due to the fact that the government seems to be different in addressing
this issues and neglecting the needs of others. For the past 26 years the rate of poverty
remains unchanged. This is proven by the study conducted by the SWS survey which
says that
Thereafter, the following poverty episodes, all statistically significance, are visible in the SWS survey (quarterly since 1992): the trend in a percentage of Self-Rated Poor (SRP) was downward from 1985 to only 43 percent in early 1987; upward till early 1994, reaching 70 percent; downward till early 1988, going to 57 percent; flat till mid-2001; downward till mid-2004, to 46 percent; upward till mid-2006, at 59 percent; downward till the end of 2007, to 46 percent again. It spiked up in 2008 to 59 percent again; and most recently settle down to 53 percent in September 2009.57
This reality is a clear manifestation that our nation is being caught up stagnant to poverty.
If there is a political determination on the part of the government to alleviate the people
who are living in such degrading situation, there must be already some changes on the
state of living among the people. However, the problem is there is no initiative on the part
of the government to do some actions in order to solve or at least to lessen this problem.
Promises after promises have been uttered for the past two decades to address this
problem. But reality speaks for itself “what the Filipino poor really need is not more
economic growth (which actually hasn’t been of much benefit to them) but consumer
57 Mahar Mangahas, “Poverty’s the same after 26 years” Philippine Daily Inquirer, Opinion, 7 November 2009, A11.
33
price stability and upward flexibility of wages. Economic growth can hardly trickle down
to the poor when the purchasing power of wages is going down.”58 This is what the
people are hoping for and have been longing to have. However, none of this realization is
being acted upon. Now, because of poverty millions of Filipinos are suffering from
hunger. According to Sen. Francis Escudero millions of Filipinos are now suffering from
hunger.59 This is the reality that we need to confront and must not be ignored. The
Filipinos are hungry for justice and equality. While the poor became the poorest of the
poor the politicians on the other hand are enjoying the luxury of eating with silver spoon
in an atmosphere where the people are fighting for survival.
4.2.3Unemployment
Unemployment is another hint of a non-well-ordered society. According to Trade
and Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP), 26 percent of the college graduates are
unemployed. To be more precise, 26.2 percent of college graduate aged 24 years old and
below were unemployed.60 This survey shows how many Filipinos are suffering from
unemployment. Nowadays a college graduate has a difficulty in finding job what more
those who was not able finished their studies. It is sad to imagine but this is a
phenomenon that happening in the Philippines today.
In addition according to the news survey of the Enquire Monitor coming from the
National Statistic Office, of the 2.8 million Filipinos unemployed as of April 2009 Labor
58 Ibid.
59 Evelyn Macairan, “Millions are now hungry” The Philippine Star, News, 25 July 2009, P2.
60 Ibid.
34
Force, about half are 15 to 24 years old . While third are between ages 25 and 34.61 To be
more understood here is the chart.
Moreover it shows that most Filipinos are suffering from great unemployment.
This is the reality present in the Philippines today. What is the government doing in this
kind of situation? If this social problem continues to grow what would be the future of the
Filipino families. Indeed this picture that Philippines is not a well-ordered society.
4.2.3 Conflicts in Mindanao
61
? Kate Pedroso, “Most of Unemployed between 15 and 34 (In percent, April 2009)”, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 14 July, 2009, B1, together with the chart
35
There are numerous hints to prove that Philippine society is not well-ordered. One
of those few hints are continues bloody conflict that is happening in some of the countries
region, particularly in Mindanao. The war in Mindanao has a long history. The certainty
of the origin of the conflict cannot be traced anymore because of lone period of conflict
that involves so many aspects of misunderstanding and clashes and ideology. 62
This continuous bloody conflict is affecting every individual particularly those
who are living within the boundaries of the regions in Mindanao. This includes families
who are forced to seek for the other settlements and worst children and youth who are
caught in the cross fire of the clashing ideologies of the government and the rebels.63
This sad reality is being confronted not only by those people involved in the war,
but by the whole Filipino society itself. It affects not only the development of the nation,
but even its peace and order that is always being threaded by the relation of both clashing
parties.
Chapter 5
5.0 Evaluation and Application
5.1 Strengths and weaknesses
One of the good claims of John Rawls concept of justice is his primary aim for a
democratic society to set the most appropriate conception of justice. In setting the most
appropriate conception of justice for a democratic society, Rawls presents the key
elements and structure in attaining a well-ordered society. “Moreover, the fundamental
62 http://www.anakmindanao.com/content/view/202/45/ (accessed January 15, 2009)
63 Ibid.
36
aim of the conception of justice as fairness is to present principle that provides the most
reasonable norms for guiding the political judgments of members of democratic society
in exercising their responsibilities as citizens.”64 In this quotation the principles that
Rawls is saying is the principle of equal liberty and the difference principle of equal
opportunity. Thus Rawls fits his conception of justice for a democratic society. He
believes that the key elements in attaining a well-ordered society rest on the two
principles of the conception of justice as fairness. For Rawls it is possible to attain the
well-ordered society only if we follow the two principles articulated in justice as fairness.
Furthermore the first principle Rawls speaks of equal liberty. According to this
principle each person is to have maximum equal liberty.65 Every individual must be
treated and respected equally according to their liberty. Moreover this principle must be
satisfied first and the second principle automatically followed. Equal liberty is not liberty
as such. For Rawls there are basic liberties that are basic one. These are the liberties of
conscience, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of
person including freedom of psychological oppression, physical assault,
disembarrassment or integrity of the person, the rights to hold personal property, the right
to vote, and freedom from arbitrary arrest.66 Liberty is very important to every individual.
“By liberty, is understood according to the proper signification of the words, the absence
of external impediments: which impediments, may oft take away part of mans power to
64 Samuel Freeman, Cambridge Companion to Rawls (Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 87.
65
? Ibid., 280.
66 Rawls, Theory of Justice, 53.
37
do what he would: but cannot hinder left him, according as his judgments and reason
shall dictate to him.”67 Liberty satisfies the nature of man. Man has the inclination to
socialize within the society and as he socializes he must have something to hold on to
protect his right and it was his liberty. Aristotle said “Man by nature is a social animal” 68
Being as such he needs to become to become just in order for him to live in harmony with
others in a society. Thus he needs to become fair in protecting his liberty and others.
Moreover the second principle automatically follows the difference principle of
fair opportunity. This principle speaks equal fair opportunity. Every individual has the
right to work for himself in the society to sustain his basic needs. The principle of fair
opportunity pertains to those who are regardless.69 Thus this principle is designed for the
worst off. Speaking of the worst of this are the people who are poorer than the poor. As
human person they are part of the society and they are not disregarded less and they have
the right to be accepted in any kind of opportunities that can be found inside the society.
Like any other individuals they have the liberty too. The acceptance of works and
economic opportunities are not only for the rich and the middle class in the society but
poor must be included also as part of the society. Furthermore in this principle also Rawls
stresses the significance of sharing one’s ability. Not all people are gifted.70 In order for
man to be equal with others one must share his ability or skill in order to benefit the worst
67Robert C. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings, 630.
68 Jean Verian, Made for Happiness Discovering the Way of Life With Aristotle, trans., Kathryn Spink ( Great Britain: Dorton, Longman and Todd Ltd., 2001), 128.69
? The term “regardless” pertains to the worst off people in the society
70 The word “gifted” refers to a certain talent or talented man
38
off or the least advantage and make use of it. Thus sharing one’s skill to another is a kind
of justice to those who want to learn.
Another good point to consider for Rawls conception of justice is his assertion on
justice as the first virtue of the social institutions. In this assertion Rawls is trying to say
that justice must be practiced and applied in every social institution. Like a man who
practiced virtue to himself in order to attain his goal in life, like justice as a virtue it must
also be practiced and applied in order to attain the well-ordered society as the goal.
Furthermore another good point to consider is his view on a well-ordered society.
In a well-ordered society he asserts that it is a society regulated by the two principles
without implying a broad conception of the human good.71 Rawls vision of a good
society can be pictured in a well-ordered society. He believed that the two principles of
justice can create harmony in every citizen as well as to the society.
What is a Rawlsian good society? It is an order of harmony and cooperation which expressed through both institutions and personal relations among citizens sharing a commitment for justice. It is a space where people express their individuality through meaning labor, and more importantly, it is a society where disparities in the distribution of wealth are always seen with suspicion and leveled through state policies. Rawls stands for “a democratic regime in which land and capital are widely though not presumably equally held. Society is not so divided that one fairly small sector controls the preponderance of productive resources.72
This statement stressed the meaning of a good society according to Rawls.
Moreover it pictures what a well-ordered society is. A well-ordered society is similar
with the concept of decent society by Avishai Margalit. For Margalit a decent society
does not humiliate people and a civilized society does not humiliate with one another.73
71 Roberto Alejandro, The Limits of Rawlsian Justice (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press., 1997), 123.
72 Ibid., 24.
73 Margalit , The Decent Society, 1.
39
If there is humiliation happening among people it is not a sign of a decent society.
Similarly with Rawls, he would claim that a well-ordered society is in harmony where
every individual should be treated equally according to their liberty and basic rights.
Moreover for Rawls inequality is not bad in the society but it is unfair. That’s why he
came up with the conception of justice as justice as fairness. Thus in a well ordered
society treat every individual with equality according to their basic rights and it is in
harmony with the two principles.
On the other hand from the very beginning of the discussion of Rawls concept of
justice in the society, Rawls gives to much focus on the equality of every individual in
the society primarily in his Theory of Justice where can his concept of justice can be
found. One of the destructing views of Rawls conception of justices his constant
affirmation of absolute equality of every individual inside society. However the
researcher finds this concept unattainable or obscure. In the first place Rawls presented a
principle of justice that pertains to the equality of every individual but Rawls sets a limit
and inequality is permissible. Thus how can it be absolute if there are exemptions?
Another weak point to consider about Rawls conception of justice is it is limited
only for a democratic society. “In the Preface to A Theory of Justice, Rawls indicates that
one of his primary aims is to set forth the most appropriate moral conception of justice
for a democratic society, a moral conception that was better suited to interpreting the
democratic values of freedom and equality than the reigning utilitarian tradition.”74 Thus
Rawls fitted his conception of justice for only a democratic society only. Thus it cannot
be applicable to other forms of society.
74 Freeman, Rawls, 8.
40
Moreover Rawls was criticized by Robert Nozick on his account of justice.” He
argues specifically against Rawls, that a theory of justice should be structured to protect
individual rights against state interference and should not promote pertaining
arrangements that I affect redistribute economic benefits and burdens.” 75It is clear in this
statement that Rawls theory of justice are not structured to protect the rights against the
state interference Rawls was much focus his concept of justice on the equality of every
individual. This is one of the weak points to consider in Rawls concept of justice. In
Robert Nozick’s, Anarchy and Utopia he criticized Rawls saying,
If things fell from heaven like manna, and no one had any special entitlement to any portion of it, and no manna would fall unless all agreed to a particular distribution, and somehow the quantity varied depending on the distribution, then it is plausible to claim that person placed so that they couldn’t make treats, or hold out for specially shares, would ate agree to the difference principle of distribution. But is this the appropriate ate model for thinking about how the things people produced are to be distributed.76
In this statement Rawls was accused by Nozick that he was thinking that social
goods are like norms. Thus, for Nozick, Rawls has an incorrect thinking of what is meant
by social goods. These are some of the criticisms of John Rawls theory of justice.
5.2 Application
5.2.1 Rawlsian Justice in the Philippine Context
Philippines is indeed convoluted with so many social problems in the society. It
can be said that it is not well-ordered due to the fact that many Filipinos are suffering
from social injustices. However, the student-researcher presented some social issues
facing by Philippines today that can be considered as hint of a non well-ordered society.
75 Tom L. Beauchamp, Philosophical Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1991), 375.
76 Ibid.
41
The social issues such as corruption, poverty, unemployment etc. are but among the many
problems facing the Philippines today that hinder its progression as industrialized
country. These problems are not normal anymore for the Filipinos and it is already
alarming. Nowadays, Filipinos are still in the realm for the quest of justice and hoping for
a well-ordered society. But how the Filipinos will attain the well-ordered society that they
are longing for a long time, if the situation is chaotic? Indeed this problem already needs
a most reasonable remedy. However, in this situation the question is will it be possible
for Philippines to become a well-ordered society despite the fact that it is convoluted with
so many social problems both economic and political.
Hence the question on the possibility of having a well-ordered society in the
Philippines is the focus of the student-researcher. With this scenario the student-
researcher wants to prove the possibility of having a well-ordered society in the
Philippines by applying Rawls notion of justice. But how could it be? The Filipino people
are hoping to have a well-ordered society yet there is a lacking elements why even until
now it was not attained. Looking back of Rawls notion of justice it provides the key
elements on the possibility of attaining a well-ordered society. Perhaps these key
elements that Rawls are emphasizing are the lacking elements needed by the Philippines.
Rawls was so much concerned in the justice system in the society particularly in a
democratic society like Philippines. Philippines is a democratic society yet not well-
ordered for the reason that it is convoluted with so many social problems and anomalies
in the government it is understood that there is a problem with regards to the justice
system in the Philippines. In this kind of problem Rawls set the most appropriate
principle for a democratic society in order to attain the well-ordered society. Hence, the
42
most appropriate principles that Rawls is emphasizing is the two principles of justice
articulated in justice as fairness. These are the principles of equal liberty and the
difference principles. However, in order to justify Rawls notion of justice is applicable in
having a well-ordered society in the Philippines the student- researcher will present the
two principles in relation with the present problem facing by Philippines today. For
Rawls it is not possible to attain a well-ordered society if these principles is being
followed and applied in every social institution. Similarly, in the Philippines if this
principles is applied and followed perhaps it is not possible to have well-ordered society
in the Philippines. However, it can be noticed that most of the social problems facing of
Philippines today pertains to unequal distribution of wealth, depravation of liberty and
unemployment. Hence, Rawls principle of justice practically concerned with these social
issues present in the Philippines today. To justify Rawls notion of justice is applicable
and let’s take the problem of corruption by the political leaders who are in authority. In
the Philippines many Filipinos are suffering from great poverty because of corruption.
According to Rawls justice is fairness, but what are the political leaders doing? Now the
question is are they fair enough with the people? Probably it is evident that the answer is
NO, due to the fact that they misused the funds intended for the people. They are using
the money for their own good and neglecting the needs of others that they are supposed to
serve. In this context Rawls notion of justice will aid this problem that is happening at
present in the Philippines. According to Rawls every individual has the basic liberty and
everyone must be respected according to the rights. However, this problem of corruption
has something to do with Rawls principle of justice particularly the principle of equal
distribution of wealth. According to this principle every individual must be given equal
43
distribution of wealth and no one should take advantage. If this principle would be
practiced and applied by the political leaders in the Philippines perhaps the tendency is
that the case of poverty in the Philippines will be lessen. Thus, government leaders must
give what is due to the people and must not sabotage it. According to Rawls a just society
gives an equal distribution of wealth to the people. An equal distribution of wealth is a
matter of justice.
Moreover, Rawls considered justice as first virtue of the society. Thus must be
practiced and applied. Similarly, it must be applied and practiced also in the Philippines,
particularly by the political leaders and every individual Filipino citizen to create
harmony to each and every one as well as in the society. Thus, if these principles are
being followed there is the possibility that Philippines will progress and will have a well-
ordered society.
Indeed this problem facing by Philippines today needs a most reasonable
solution. However the student researcher attempt to use Rawls concept of justice. But
how could it be valid? Rawls provides the most reasonable principle for a democratic
society that the student researcher would like to prove that it is effective. The hints
presented by the student researcher however pertain to inequality. Looking at Rawls
concept of a well-ordered society it is described as regulated by the two principles
namely the principle of liberty and the difference principle. Rawls asserts that if these key
elements which are the two principles it is not impossible to attain the well-ordered
society. Similarly also in the Philippines if this conception of justice by Rawls be applied
and followed the key elements in attaining the well-ordered society there is a possibility
44
that Philippines will progress. Thus Rawls conception of justice will lead the Philippines
to become a well-ordered society.
Chapter 6
6.0 Conclusion
Rawls notion of justice provides the key elements of attaining a well-ordered
society. He claims that egalitarianism or equal treatment of every individual is necessary
in attaining a well-ordered society. For Rawls a well-ordered society is in harmony with
justice. Every human person desires what is good for him. Thus, the ultimate goal of man
in life is happiness and satisfaction. As human person man does not want to be treated
unjustly nor humiliated by others. Indeed, this is very true in man’s life. Justice however,
45
is established for the common good of every individual in the society. It is design to
protect the right of every person. Justice plays a very important role in the society. Rawls
asserts that justice should be the basic structure in the society. However, justice is not
only for the rich but for everybody. Equal treatment of every individual in the society is
very necessary. Without justice perhaps, society is chaotic. One of the good claims in
Rawls conception of justice is his assertion that justice should be the first virtue of every
social institution.
Hence, justice as a virtue it is essential to maintain the well being of the society.
That is the equality among the individual in order to avoid any impediments which is
mostly the cause of inequality. Justice is considered as a virtue, because it must be
practice and applied inside the society.
However, in the discussion of the student-researcher he claims that the Philippines
is not a well-ordered society. This is proven through gathering of facts from news and
reliable networks. The student-researcher points out why the Philippines is not well-
ordered due to the fact that corruption and unemployment can be considered of a non
well-ordered society. Furthermore, after evaluating Rawls conception of justice and
applying it in the Philippine context, the student-researcher would like to say unless we
don’t practice the virtue of justice in the society, it is obscure to have a well-ordered
society. The society and its people will still continue to struggle in order to find justice in
the society which in time creates further chaos, like civil disobedience, rebellion, and to
the extent of revolution.
If justice is not practice there is a tendency for the people to seek justice in any
means. Thus, this creates further division and trouble that hinders progress in the society.
46
Looking back in the Philippine context for the past three centuries, starting from the pre-
Spanish period up to the present, the Filipino is still struggling in search for justice.
However, this is not being recognized because the society is lacking in the promotion of
justice that will help in order to attain equality among the people.
The Filipino people desire a well-ordered society but justice seems to be obscure
especially among those people who do not have the material means to protect their rights.
In situation like this Rawls concept of justice, if it is going to be applied the extent of
inequality in our society will be lessened and thus it will open the path towards a better
life in the society in which justice is practice. In this context the student-researcher would
want to say that all the individual have the role to practice justice. This is due to the fact
that this will help attain a compact society which in Rawls view is a well-ordered society.
This situation is like a family, wherein justice is practice and inequality is avoided. Thus,
it promotes a greater bond in the family. However, the student-researcher agreed with
Rawls in his claim that justice is the key principle in order to attain the well-ordered
society. These are the principles of liberty and the difference principle. The former
promotes equal liberties among the individuals living in the society. It values the rights of
the person to exercise their freedom and protects their integrity as a human being. The
latter has the twofold function. First, it includes the equal opportunity among its members
either in education or economic opportunities. Second, it promotes the individual rights to
have an equal opportunity in having a work that will sustain their daily needs. However,
this is important for each individual in the society to have a reasonable to sustain
themselves and their family.
47
Lastly, the student-researcher, found out that Rawls notion of justice can be the
key elements in order to attain a well-ordered society in the Philippines. Hence, if the
basic elements will be practiced and applied in the Philippine context there is a possibility
of attaining it in our society. After presenting the necessary elements in John Rawls
concept of justice the student researcher would like to conclude that Rawls concept of
justice will lead the Philippines to attain a well-ordered society.