Advertisement

Rawls, Order Ethics, and Rawlsian Order Ethics

  • Ludwig Heider
  • Nikil Mukerji
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter discusses how order ethics relates to the theory of justice. We focus on John Rawls’s influential conception “Justice as Fairness” (JF) and compare its components with relevant aspects of the order-ethical approach. The two theories, we argue, are surprisingly compatible in various respects. We also analyse how far order ethicists disagree with Rawls and why. The main source of disagreement that we identify lies in a thesis that is central to the order ethical system, viz. the requirement of incentive-compatible implementability. It purports that an ethical norm can be normatively valid only if individuals have a self-interested motive to support it. This idea conflicts with the Rawlsian view because there are cases where it is not clear, from the standpoint of self-interest, why everybody should support its moral demands. If the thesis of incentive-compatible implementability is, in fact, correct, a proponent of JF would have to reform her views. We suggest how she could do that while salvaging the heart of her normative system as a “regulative idea”. The conception that would result from this reformation may be seen as a new variant of order ethics, which we propose to call “Rawlsian Order Ethics.”

Keywords

Difference principle Distributive justice Equality of opportunity Freedom Income redistribution Justice Liberty Order ethics Pareto Rawls Rawlsian order ethics Rights 

References

  1. Arneson, Richard. 2008. Equality of opportunity. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/equal-opportunity.
  2. Barry, Christian. 2011. Redistribution. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2011 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/redistribution.
  3. Buchanan, James M. 1975/2000. The limits of liberty: Between anarchy and leviathan. Indianapolis, Indiana: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  4. Buchanan, James M. 1990. The domain of constitutional economics. Constitutional Political Economy 1: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, Gerald A. 1991. Incentives, inequality, and community. In The tanner lectures on human values 13, ed. Grethe B. Peterson, 1992, 262–329. Utah: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  6. Hirsch, Fred. 1977. The social limits to growth. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  7. Hobbes, Thomas. 1651/1996. Leviathan, ed. John Gaskin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Homann, Karl. 2001. “Ökonomik: Fortsetzung der Ethik mit anderen Mitteln“, in: Homann (2002), 243–266.Google Scholar
  9. Homann, Karl. 2002. Vorteile und Anreize, ed. Christoph Luetge. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  10. Homann, Karl, and Franz Blome-Drees. 1992. Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  11. Homann, Karl and Christoph Luetge. 2004/2005. Einführung in die Wirtschaftsethik. Münster: LIT-Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. Luetge, Christoph. 2005. Economic ethics, business ethics and the idea of mutual advantages. Business Ethics: A European Review 14(2): 108–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Luetge, Christoph. 2007a. Social glue under conditions of globalisation: Philosophers on essential normative resources. In Globalisation and business ethics, ed. Karl Homann, Peter Koslowski, and Christoph Luetge, 191–201. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  14. Luetge, Christoph. 2007b. Was halt eine Gesellschaft zusammen?. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  15. Mukerji, Nikil. 2009. Das Differenzprinzip von John Rawls und seine Realisierungsbedingungen. Münster: LIT-Verlag.Google Scholar
  16. Mukerji, Nikil and Julian Nida-Rümelin. 2014. Towards a moderate stance on human enhancement. Humana.ment—Journal of Philosophical Studies 26:17–33.Google Scholar
  17. Mukerji, Nikil, and Christoph Schumacher. 2008. How to have your cake and eat it too: Resolving the efficiency-equity trade-off in minimum wage legislation. The Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 19(4): 315–340.Google Scholar
  18. Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  19. Rawls, John. 1971/1999. A theory of justice (Revised Edition). Cambridge: Harvard University Press (cited as TJ).Google Scholar
  20. Rawls, John. 1993/1996. Political liberalism. Political liberalism – expanded edition. New York: Columbia University Press Books (cited as PL).Google Scholar
  21. Rawls, John. 1999/2003. Justice as fairness. In A restatement (third edition). ed. Erin Kelly. Cambridge: Harvard University Press (cited as JF).Google Scholar
  22. Sinn, Hans-Werner. 1986. Risiko als Produktivitätsfaktor. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 201: 557–571.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, and the Study of ReligionLudwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations