Discussion 6 - John Rawls, "A Theory of Justice"
1 1 unread reply. 1 1 reply.
Does Rawls' approach provide a better social contract than Hobbes?

For this discussion board recall the last module's reading from Hobbes' Leviathan and contrast it with the position of John Rawls in the selection from the first of his seminal work in political philosophy, A Theory of Justice (1972).

First, explain Rawls' argument for the Original Position and it helps us choose the basic structure of society. Next briefly reiterate Hobbes' argument for an absolute monarchy. Finally, consider each of the readings and provide an argument for which of these positions is a better or more realistic vision of political life. Choose only one to support, not both. Make sure you consider both readings equally in your response.

Required Reading John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Selection)

Recommended Reading Original Position, Sections 1, 2, & 3.
< http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/original-position/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. >

Important: You may find some of the information in Sections 5 & 6 helpful. Please be advised that you should proceed through this material in a cautious and careful manner. The terminology is tricky and it usage is not always as apparent as it would be in everyday conversation.


Discussion Board Examples
Initial Discussion Post Good Response Score 5/5
In Daniel C. Dennett's "The Origins of Selves" he compares our "self" to a spokesman or "Head of Mind". He states, "The
language-producing systems of the brain have to get their instructions from somewhere, and the very demands of
pragmatics and grammar would conspire to confer something like Head of Mind authority on whatever subsystem
currently controls their input" (Abel, 264). For a person with MPD, he suggests, "There can, however, be no guarantee
that either the speaker or anyone else who hears him over an extended period will settle on their being just a single "I"
(Abel, 264). In Dennett's research on MPD, he has found that MPD sufferers have different personae that handle
different situations. I think of this like my co-workers at work. We have someone who is more blunt and able to deal
with more difficult clients, we have someone who is compassionate who can sit there and cry with our clients.. etc. An
MPD sufferer just has all those wrapped in to one and it appears, most of the time, one of their selves doesn't know
what the other is doing.
I think this theory compares to Giles' theory because his theory is about us viewing ourselves as ever changing
substances. But I only see a comparison when considering it with an MPD sufferer. It appears to me that Dennett does
believe that there is a sense of consciousness that defines who we are. He states, "We have language and preserve
ourselves by creating and telling stories about whom we are. Although the human self seems to be the source of the
narrative we tell, it is in fact not the source, but the product of this narrative" (Abel, 254),
I would prefer Dennett's account of the self over Giles' account. I feel that we are who we are, because of what we've
been through in life. I don't feel that Giles' theory of "no-self" gives us the individuality and consciousness of our
experiences and memories. With Dennett's theory we aren't limited to how we feel at a certain time about something,
we are who we are because of things that have happened to us. I guess this could be bad if you are someone who has
been through horribly awful circumstances and it's made you a horribly awful person, but that just further proves that a
person who has had bad experiences and comes out of them better than before is a strong person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abel, Donald C. Fifty Readings in Philosophy. "The Origins of Selves" Pages 254,264. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. Print.