However, what are "the common good" and a "fair distribution of burdens" and what is the position of religious values in a secular legal system? Later philosophers have developed the concept of Distributive Justice has produced other theories of justice.
Originally published in June ; updated in June by Heidi Burgess The Notion of Fair Distribution Distributive justice is concerned with the fair allocation of resources among diverse members of a community. Fair allocation typically takes into account the total amount of goods to be distributed, the distributing procedure, and the pattern of distribution that results.
In Global Distributive Justice, Armstrong distinguishes between distributive justice generally and principles of distributive justice.
Armstrong defines distributive justice as the ways that the benefits and burdens of our lives are shared between members of a society or community. Principles of distributive justice tell us how these benefits and burdens ought to be shared or distributed.
The common answer is that public assets should be distributed in a reasonable manner so that each individual receives a "fair share. Equality, equity, and need are among the most common criteria. In other words each person will get the same amount. However, due to differences in levels of need, this will not result in an equal outcome.
For example, every incoming freshman to a local college with a grade point above 3. Thus, those who make a greater productive contribution to their group deserve to receive more benefits. Thus, in theory, people who work harder in more valuable jobs should earn more money.
This sort of distribution is typically associated with an economic system where there is equal opportunity to compete. In competitive systems, wealth or goods might also be distributed according to effort or ability. Or, we might distribute goods according to need, so that an equal outcome results.
Those who need more of a benefit or resource will receive more, as occurs when colleges offer needs-based scholarships, or states provide welfare payments to the poor. Some suggest a system of competition that includes safety nets for those who cannot compete.
This sort of system combines the principle of equity with that of need. It attempts to reward people for their productivity at the same time that it ensures their basic needs are met. Finally, we might distribute resources according to social utility, or what is in the best interests of society as a whole.
This is the argument that is frequently made by high-paid executives, who not only argue that they deserve their high salaries because of their contributions to their businesses, but they also argue that they are the "job creators," thus paying them highly benefits society as a whole.
Others, however, think taxing them highly and using the income to provide services to the less fortunate would be of greater overall benefit to the society. Different sorts of distributions advance different social goals. For a society to function effectively, it must keep its membership, engage in efficient and effective production, and sustain the well-being of its members.
Equal distribution is thought to give people a sense of full-fledged membership. Because these principles are often in tension with one another, one of them is typically regarded as the central criterion of distribution.A Theory of Justice Essay Words | 16 Pages.
A Theory of Justice Communitarian critics of Rawls have argued that his A Theory of Justice provides an inadequate account of individuals in .
Insofar as it is linked to the notion of fair processes, distributive justice has ties to concerns about procedural justice.
In some cases, the thing to be distributed is not a benefit, but a burden. For example, one might be concerned with the fairness of allocation of . Distributive justice will ensure social, economic and political justice. Violence and militancy are primarily the result of failed distributive justice.
Analysing the emergence and growth of the ‘naxalite’ movements in India, it could be found that the negation of distributive justice was one of the major factor the led to these militant organizations. Systematic Theology (Louis Berkhof) - Ebook download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read book online.
There are current functioning examples of Rawls’ theory of distributive justice throughout the modern world, mainly in the countries like Norway, Netherlands, and Germany. I believe that Rawls’s philosophy when correctly applied would make for a just and fair society.
The academic field of criminal justice explores how laws are created, interpreted, and enforced within different countries, states, municipalities, and other jurisdictions.
|Listen to my blog||Fair equality of opportunity[ edit ] This principle maintains that "offices and positions"  should be open to any individual, regardless of his or her social background, ethnicity or sex. It is stronger than 'Formal Equality of Opportunity' in that Rawls argues that an individual should not only have the right to opportunities, but should have an effective equal chance as another of similar natural ability.|