First, liberty in principle.
It means people can do anything even he can not achieve it. For example, I want to fly. No body has right to stop me to try that. This kind of liberty is only limited by liberty of others.
Second, liberty in reality.
It means I want to do and be able to achieve it. For example, I want to get out of the door and do it.
From the first to the second, there is a gap. It is the restriction of condition. Some of condition is artificial. This can be and should be abandoned. For example, the interference from others or government. Some are natural. For example, no body has the ability to fly without device. It is equal and unremovable for all men. There is unequal but natural restriction. For example, the disability caused by nature or accidence. Some unequal natural restriction cannot be removed, like disability. Some can be adjusted artificially. For example, the material restriction can be adjusted by redistribution. But this involves interference with other individual's freedom or rights.
This is the debate between Rawls and Nozick. The key is how we understand the unequal natural but removable restriction of liberty. The point is inequality. It the inequality just? Both of them think it is neither just or unjust. But their way of treating it is different.
Rawls thinks that although it is natural inequality, from moral point, it is arbitrary. Nobody deserves what they get from nature. The important thing is how the institution treats the inequality. He believes that institution has the obligation to adjust the inequality A's much A's it can do. because he considers the institution A's a cooperative system. Every body contribute to it and benefit from it.
Nozick thinks that although it inequality, it is natural. Every body has a right to his natural endowment. Those unfortunate are misery but it is not the reason to violate other's rights. A's long A's, one's property is got through just way, he has the right to it. It is inviable. Institution has no right to sacrifice one part to benefit the other part. It is unjust.
No comments:
Post a Comment