Justice

How does one apply Rawls's theory of justice to concrete situations? Recently I've tried to think about how the theory would apply to the use of torture in interrogations (which I hope the theory would forbid) and to the use of racial profiling on the New York City subways (which I hope it would permit). Comment on these or other examples would be appreciated. --Steven New York, NY

Comments

Freedom from torture would be among the basic liberties protected by Rawls's first principle of justice. This means that the government could restrict this freedom only for the sake of this or other basic liberties (Rawls's "first priority rule"). To justify such a restriction, the government would need to show that the basic liberties of the representative citizen would be more secure with (and despite) this restriction than without. A compelling argument to this effect could be made only in exceptional circumstances when the use of torture makes a necessary and substantial contribution to the security of citizens' basic liberties.

I do not think that Rawls would have thought freedom from racial profiling to be among the basic liberties. But, even if it were, the government could justify it by showing that the basic liberties of the representative member of the profiled group are more secure with (and despite) racial profiling than without (for example, because racial profiling enables the police better to protect members of the profiled group from crime).

Read another response by Thomas Pogge

Read another response about Justice