CHAPTER I 1.0 Preliminaries 1.1 Introduction Every human person wants to be in a just and well-ordered society.A society that is tranquil, peaceful, orderly, and just. How nice it would be to live in this kind of society. This is a reality in the life of every human person that cannot be denied. Who wants to be in a chaotic society? For sure nobody wants to be in this kind of society. However the quest for justice has not yet ended even up to this time. “We live in a world in search of justice and we are surprised to find justice already in chains.”1Nowadays many people are still suffering from injustices social, political, liberal, and economic. Among those who suffered from injustices were the Filipinos. It is sad to imagine but is something true for most of them. If there are injustices happening inside the society it’s a sign that a society is not in proper order. Perhaps there is lacking element why it is not in order. However it is impossible to call the Philippines as a well-ordered and just society because of the fact that there are a lot of cases of injustices that is happening until now. But what are those cases of injustices that make the Philippines as a non-wellordered society? Is there any hint? Looking at the political system of the Philippine society it is democratic. Although it’s democratic society many Filipinos find difficulty in finding where justice is particularly the poor. What makes the Philippines not a well-ordered society? It is because there are many corrupt leaders. This is the reason why the Philippines still belongs to the third world country. Political and economic issues sprout left and right. Ramon K. Illusario, Crisis and Paradigm: An Inquiry into the Cause of Social Breakdown and A Prescription for Future Resolution ( Manila, Philippines: Multinational Foundation Co.,Inc., 1984) Foreword 1 2 The Philippines today are facing various problems both politically, socially, and economically. There are a lot of hints and facts in the Philippine society saying that it is a non-well-ordered society. If we could still remember there seems to be no end in the war in Mindanao between the government and the Abu Sayyaf bandits, Filipinos fighting and killing each other. In fact, the latest news of the terrible massacre of the group of journalists in Maguindanao by the Ampatuans is a clear manifestation that the Philippines is not in a well-ordered society. There is no peace, politics is so dirty and corruption is rampant even in the grassroots. In addition looking back at the previous problems last 2009, there were the issues concerning the rice shortage, oil price hike, electricity crisis, and rising unemployment, the ZTE-NBN scandal, jueteng payola, and fertilizer fund scam. They weres left unresolved. The issue on the falling income, according to the GDP per capita it shrank to US$ in 2000 from US$1,29 in 1997 while the GNP per capita contracted to US$1,033 from US$1,97. It is the result of the survey of the Asian Financial Crisis which caught up in the Philippines in 19198.2The Unequal Regional Development, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) reported that Metro Manila’s per capita Gross Regional Domestic Product (GDRP) in 2000 was more twice that than of the national average and more than five times that of Bicol Region.3There are 5.1 Million Poor families, according to NSO survey in 2000 and 19.9 percent of families in urban areas and 46.9 in rural areas. The number of poor families climbed to 5.1 Million, 1.5 million of them in the urban areas and 3.6 million in rural areas. Furthermore 2.5 million families were living in subsistence level. 4It 2 http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/social.php ( accessed July 18,2009) Ibid. Ibid. 3 4 3 means that their income was not enough to buy their basic needs. According to DOLE 10.8 million Filipinos were under employed and 26 percent of College Graduate according to Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) in 2002, 3.5 Billion Lost to project anomalies, US$ 53.4 billion foreign debt, Philippines has 2500 Armed Rebels, and 147 Billion Budget Shortage.5This are the facts that saying that Philippines not a well-ordered society. There was a lot of budget from the government that was not distributed properly for the people. Thus this is a kind of injustice among the Filipino people. According to the Plato’s Republic justice is giving what is owed to the person.6 Thus give what is supposed for a man. However this can be considered as a hint of a nonwell-ordered society because it shows inequality among the people and it’s a kind of injustice. The quest for justice among the Filipinos has not yet ended because of so many social problems that affect their lives. What is the concept of justice for the Filipinos? Despite the fact that the Philippines is bombarded with social and political issues and problems in the society however the question is, is there a hope in the Philippine society to become a well-ordered? However the student researcher would like to suggest means on the possibility of a well-ordered society in the Philippines. In this context the studentresearcher will try to attempt to apply John Rawls concept of justice to attain the so called well-ordered society in the Philippines. But how is this concept is applicable? According to the facts that the student researcher presented most of the issues are pertaining to inequality. Many Filipinos were not much benefitting from the society because of 5 Ibid. 6 Plato, Republic, trans. G.M.A.Grube, rev.ed. ( Cambridge:Hacket Publishing Company, Inc,1992 ),7. 4 anomalies among political leaders. The funds that supposed to for them were taken by the corrupt leaders like the fertilizer scam. For sure those who were affected by this issue will seek for justice most specially the farmers who are expecting for that fund. What kind of justice is proper for them? What kind of justice is proper in this case? According to John Rawls, justice is fairness and it should be the first virtue of the society.7 But would this concept of justice possible in the Philippines? It can be possible because Philippines is a democratic country and Rawls conception of justice focused on a democratic society. Rawls concept of justice is political not metaphysical, because it focuses only in the society not going beyond.8 However it can be a means and possible to happened if this concept of justice will be applied. John Rawls concept of justice leads the Philippines into a well ordered society. 1.2 Statement of the Problem The aim of the student researcher focuses on the study of John Rawls Theory of Justice on how it could be applied in the Philippines in order to have a well-ordered society. However to make this work organized the student- researcher will pose a question that will facilitate to the flow of the discussion. The student-researcher will focus on the following questions: 1.2.1 What is John Rawls notion of justice? 1.2.2 What is a well-ordered society according to Rawls? 1.2.3 What is the Filipino concept of justice? John Rawls, Theory of Justice (New York: Harvard University and Oxford Press, 1971), 3. 7 8 John Rawls, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement ( Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2001) Editor’s Foreword 5 1.2.4 How does John Rawls concept of justice can lead the Philippines into a wellordered society? 1.2.5 What makes Rawls concept of Justice applicable in the Philippines? Moreover these questions will serve as the backbone in the discussion of this paper. The answers to this question will be discussed by the student-researcher on the body of this paper. 1.3 Significance of the Study The significance of this study is to have a clear understanding and good presentation of John Rawls “concept of justice, and deepen the understanding of the student-researcher of the notion of “justice” for the Filipinos. This study is important because it talks about the social problems and hint of a non well-ordered society in the Philippines. However this paper tries to propose a means relevant to the social problem facing by the Philippines today. It is the hope of the student researcher to prove in this paper that John Rawls concept of justice can be a means. Moreover this study lies on the student-researchers attempt in using Rawls concept that will lead the Philippine society into a well-ordered society. 1.4 Scope and Delimitation There are many concepts of justice and it is very broad. However the studentresearcher will be specific in using the concept of justice. Thus he will focus only on John Rawls concept of Justice. The student researcher will use the works of John Rawls particularly his book “A Theory of Justice” and “Justice as Fairness”. There will be a discussion on the notion of justice of the Filipinos and hints of a non-well- ordered 6 society in the Philippines. Moreover the student-researcher will mainly rely on the question posed on the statement of the problem. 1.5 Procedural Design The student researcher will be using the descriptive remedial approach. The point of departure of this paper will begin to the presentation of the first chapter: statement of the problem, significance of the study, scope and delimitation, procedural design and review of related literature. In the second chapter the life and works of John Rawls will be discussed as well as the major influences of John Rawls way of thinking. In the third chapter, will dwell on John Rawls notion of justice will be elaborated and discussed. There will be also a discussion on John Rawls concept of a well-ordered society. In the fourth chapter the notion of justice by the Filipinos will also be discussed. Moreover in this chapter also the student-researcher will exposed the argument on John Rawls concept of justice applied in the Philippines. In the fifth chapter the student-researcher will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Rawlsian justice then afterwards he will apply it on the Philippine context. In the last chapter the student-researcher will make the conclusion. 1.6 Definition of Terms 1.6.1 Justice 7 -as fairness9 -the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought10 1.6.2 Society -More or less self-sufficient associations of persons who in their relations to one another recognize certain rules of conduct as binding and who for the most part act accordance with them.11 1.6.3 Well-ordered Society -It is a society in which everyone accepts and knows that the others accept the same principle, and basic social institutions satisfy and are known to satisfy this principle.12 1.6.4 Equality -It is a relationship between different people. There is equality when they are equally supplied with resources, or equally happy.13 1.6.5 Egalitarianism -It is the view that all humans are equal and should be treated equally in liberties, rights, respect, and opportunities. 14 1.7 Review of Related Literature John Rawls, Theory of Justice (New York: Harvard University Press and Oxford University Press, 1971), xi. 9 10 Ibid., 3. Ibid., 4. Ibid., 279. 11 12 Dennis Mackerlie, “Equality”, Ethics: An International Journal of Social and Legal Philosophy, vol. 1 (January 1996), 274. 14 Harper-Collins Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd s.v. “Egalitarianism” 13 8 1.7.1 Beauchamp, Tom. Philosophical Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. San Francisco. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1991. In this book the author stresses the significance of justice on egalitarianism in the light of John Rawls. However he makes an analysis on the egalitarian theory of Rawls. He begins his analysis by summarizing, The Role of Justice”, followed by the, “Original Position and Justification”, “Principle of Justice”, and the Tendency of Equality”. This book is helpful to the student researcher because it gives a synthesis on how Rawls concept of justice be easily understand. 1.7.2 Barry, Bryan, “Theory of Justice”, London. Harvester-Wheatsheaf. , 1989 This book uses John Rawls “Theory of Justice” as its framework. Some of the concepts being used in this book are taken from the other books of Rawls. In this book the student researcher deepen his understanding about the concept of a well-ordered society. It can be good reference. 1.7.3 Anderson, Elizabeth, “What is the Point of Equality?” Ethics: An International Journal of Social and Legal Philosophy. Chicago. University of Chicago Press., July 2001 In this article Elizabeth Anderson points out what is really the point of equality for the people and the negative and positive aim of egalitarian justice. For Anderson egalitarianism is a necessary to have a well-ordered society. With this article the student researcher understood that egalitarianism is necessary in the society. 1.7.4 Margalit, Avishai, “The Decent Society”, London: Harvard University Press., 1996 The book contains the concept of what a decent society is. According to the 9 Margalit, “A decent society is one whose in situations does not humiliate people.”15 Thus for the authors the decent society does not humiliate people itself. In this book being just is not to humiliate other people. Moreover this book is a good source to deepen the student researcher’s concept of a just society. Chapter 2 2.0 General Background 2.1 Life and Works of John Rawls16 John Rawls was a well-known philosopher of the 20th century and largely known by his Theory of Justice. He was born on February 21, 1921 in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A., from a well-to-do Baltimore family. His father is William Lee Rawls, a lawyer 15 Avishai Margalit, The Decent Society (London: Harvard University Press., Samuel Freeman, Rawls (Oxon: Routledge Publication, 2007), 1-8. 1998), 1. 16 10 from Eastern North Carolina near Greenville, and his mother Anna Abell Stump Rawls, a president of the New League of Women Voters in Baltimore. They were five siblings in the family and all of them are boy and he was the second. Two of his brother died at the young age. He grew up in Baltimore where his father practiced law. It was also in Baltimore he attended his first formal schooling. For six years studied in Calvert School in Baltimore and spent two years at Roland Junior High. Thereafter he transferred to an Episcopal school for boys in Kent school in Western Connecticut and graduated in 1939. Then he continued his studies at Princeton University and completes his B.A. in Philosophy in 1943. After he graduated at Princeton he joined the U.S. Army in January 1943 and there he serves as a private in the infantry. Rawls fought in the Pacific together with the 32nd Infantry Division, the “Red Arrow Division”. He spent 36-day battle in Leyte and in New Guinea and another 120-day battle in Luzon in the Philippines. One of the most memorable days of Rawls in the war was when he was hit by the bullet of an enemy on his head while drinking on the stream and it leaves a scar for the rest of his life. Rawls serve as the radio operator which is one of the most dangerous positions in the battle. He also witnessed the bombing in Hiroshima Japan. Many friends and classmates of Rawls were killed on the war. He finished his military service in January 1946. After he finished his military service, he returned to Princeton University and continues his studies for his doctorate in Philosophy. In 1949 Rawls successfully defended his thesis. He wrote his dissertation on “Moral Knowledge and Judgment on the Moral Worth of Character”, under W.T. Stace, a supervisor of dissertation on Moral worth Moral Knowledge. And at the same year also he married Margaret Warfield of 11 Philadelphia a graduate from Pembroke College at Brown University. In June 1950, Rawls received his PhD degree. From 1950 to 1952 he serve as an instructor at Princeton. Thereafter he went to Fulbright Fellowship at Oxford and there he became a member of High Table at Christ Church College. It was at Oxford where Rawls was influenced by H.L.A. Hart on the Philosophy of Law and also attended seminars of Isaiah Berlin Hampshire. In 1953 he returned to U.S, and thought at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York and serves as an assistant professor in philosophy. There he joined his former teacher Norman Malcolm and his former classmates in Princeton and lifelong friend namely Roger Abirton and David Sachs. At the age of 34 in 1957, his first book was published, Justice as Fairness. In 1962 his teaching career in Harvard starts. He thought in Harvard for almost 30 years in fulltime position teaching every year the course “Modern Political Philosophy”. During his teaching career in Harvard the year after, in 1963 he published “The Sense of Justice”, which was later developed in the chapter 8 of “Theory of Justice”. Another work was published, “The Justification of Civil Disobedience”, in 1967 which was later revised in the “Theory of Justice”. After two years in 1971, his great masterpiece was published, “Theory of Justice”. This masterpiece of Rawls contains his famous account on the “Original Position”, “Veil of Ignorance”, Equal Basic Liberties”, and Difference Principle”. The “Theory of Justice” was translated into 30 different languages and sell over half million copies. A year after the publication of his great work in 1972, he was awarded the,” Phi Beta Kappa Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize”. From 1970 to 1974 Rawls was a chairman of Harvard Philosophy Department and a President of the American Philosophical Association, Eastern Division. In 1980 he gave a lecture on “Kantian 12 Constructivism in Moral Theory”, where he presents 3 Dewey lecture at Colombia University. On the following year in 1981, he gave another lecture on, “The Basic Liberties and their Priority”, where presents the “Tanner Lecture “, at the University of Michigan. In 1981, “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical” was published and followed by “The Idea of Overlapping Consensus” after six years in 1987 and “Themes in Kant’s Moral Philosophy” in 1989. Rawls retired from full-time position in 1991 at Harvard. He thought in Harvard for 30 years. However his retirement has never become the hindrance to continue his teaching career. After his retirement Rawls still teach until 1995 teaching the same course Modern Political Philosophy. In 1993 was “Political Liberalism”. For the first time in October 1995 Rawls experienced his first mild stroke. Due to this Rawls formally retired from teaching but he never stop in writing and giving lectures. “The Idea of Public Reason” was published in 1997, then after two years,” The Law of Peoples”, and the revised of “A Theory of Justice” was published in 1999. At the same year Rawls was awarded a National Humanities Medal by President Clinton, and also Rolf Shock Prize in Logic and Philosophy. In 2002 “Justice as Fairness: A Restatement” was published. At the age of 81 on November 20, 2002 Rawls died peacefully at home in Lexington, Massachusetts. Rawls was buried in Mt. Auburn Cemetery, Cambridge, Massachusetts. After his sudden death five years later his “Lectures on the History Philosophy” with lectures on Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Rousseau, Mill, Marx, Sidgwick, and Butler was published in 2007. 2.2 Major Influences to Rawls Line of Thought17 17 Ibid ., 12-28. 13 Rawls was greatly influenced by the past great thinkers both in moral and political philosophy. However it was Rousseau’s “Social Contract” that inspired Rawls of his doctrine on the “Original Position “and on the other hand “The Convention of Justice was of David Hume. In political Philosophy during his time in Princeton, he was influenced and thought by the Wittgenstein’s student and philosopher of language Norman Malcom. Moreover he was also influenced of his thesis supervisor, the Hegel scholar W.T. Stace. Rawls was profoundly influenced by Kant. “From the idea of “the priority of right over the good” and the Kantian interpretation of justice as fairness in A Theory of Justice, to Kantian (and later Political) Constructivism and the personality and the distinction between the Reasonable and Rational in Political Liberalism, and finally the rejection of a world state and the idea of “realistic utopia” in Rawls’s Law of Peoples. One can discern that many of Rawls main ideas were deeply influenced by his understanding of Kant.”18Rawls interpretation of his conception of justice is grounded of Kant’s idea of respect for person. The initial drafts of A Theory of Justice Kant had a little direct influence in 1950s and 1960s. “The Law of Peoples” was inspired by Kant’s writings on international justice. Another great thinker to influence Rawls is Sidgwick. “Like Sedgwick’s criteria for a rational method, the original position is designed to incorporate “all relevant requirements of practical reason, (PL, 90) so that it may serve as a method of selection to decide upon the most reasonable conception of justice from among array of alternatives.”19Moreover Rawls follow also Sedgwick’s Intuitionism and perfectionism among the methods of ethics that is compared to utilitarianism. Furthermore, in writing 18 19 Ibid., 21. Ibid., 24. 14 out the ideas of Theory of Justice, Hegel had a little direct influence also to Rawls. Like Hegel, Rawls rejects the dualisms that are implicit in Kant’s transcendental philosophy. Chapter 3 John Rawls Notion of Justice 3.1 Justice as Fairness Justice as fairness, this is the concept of justice presented by John Rawls in his masterpiece A Theory of Justice. But one must need to understand why justice is conceived as fairness. What is its basis? “According to justice as fairness, the most reasonable principle of justice is those that would object of mutual agreement by person under fair conditions. Justice as fairness thus develops a theory of justice from the idea of social contract. The principles it 15 articulates affirm broadly liberal conception of basic rights and liberties, and only permit inequalities in wealth and income that would be to the advantage of the least well-off.20 Justice is the most reasonable principle in this context. However it is understood why Rawls conception of justice as fairness for the reason that in every society it cannot be deny the fact there were always group of people who are under unfair condition. Rawls concept on justice is basically focused on the basic rights and liberties and inequality is permissible only on the level of wealth and income. It can be also understood here that the conception of justice as fairness was developed from the idea of the social contract. More over justice as fairness is a political concept and not metaphysical.21 Thus Rawls conception of justice is best understood in a political concept. It is political because it only focuses on the society and not going beyond. For further understanding of Rawls concept of justice the student researcher will discuss on the next discussion his two principles of justice. 3.2 The Two Principles of Justice John Rawls conception of Justice is articulated into two principles. These are the principle of liberty and the difference principle. This is the most important part in understanding Rawls concept of justice. 3.2.1 Principle of Liberty “Each person has is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties of others.”22 John Rawls , Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, edited by Erin Kelly, (London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2001), xi 21 Ibid. 20 22 Rawls, A Theory of Justice, 53. 16 This is the first principle of Rawls notion of justice. It is primarily designed for the social and economic institutions and ascribes the equal rights and liberties of all citizens in the society. Moreover this principle stresses the significance or value of the right and liberty of every person. When Rawls speaks of liberty he is referring particularly from liberty of conscience, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of the person including freedom of psychological oppression, physical assault, disembarrassment or integrity of the person, the rights to hold personal property, the rights to vote and freedom from arbitrary arrest in accordance with the rule of the law.23 In this context it could easily be understood what principle of liberty of Rawls is trying to say about. Moreover, the principle of liberty is not reasonably require the unqualified granting of total liberty to each individual yet the liberty must be constrained by the need to protect the liberty of each individual, hence a more refined principle is adopted saying that, “each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty to all”. 24 Liberty is very important to every citizen. It is the basis if a citizen where fully recognized in the society. Most people who find least in liberty have the possibility to revolt against the society. Liberty is the voice of the people in the society. Without liberty man finds himself as an outcast in the society. In this principle basic rights and liberty is the first priority. 3.2.2 The Difference Principle 23 Ibid. Samuel Gorovitz, “John Rawls: A Theory of Justice”, Contemporary Political Philosophers, edited by Anthony de Cerspigny and Kenneth Minogue (New York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1975), 280. 24 17 “Social and economic inequalities are to arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be everyone’s advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all.”25 This principle is meant to be the greatest benefit of the least advantage of the society. However this principle has two parts. The first part is “reasonably expected to everyone’s advantage or the so called fair opportunity.”26 It requires that all citizens having the same talent and willingness to use them to have the same education and economic opportunities regardless whether they are born poor or rich.27 It means that those persons who have skills in different kinds of work must need to teach the illiterate in order to have the same skill with them. For example, the ability to write and read, not all has the ability to write and read. In order for them to learn how to read and write they need a teacher to teach. In sharing ones’ knowledge someone must be generous enough in sharing all the knowledge one has and this generous sharer must be the teacher, a competitive authority. Obviously, the students are the receiver of knowledge shared by the teacher. Every human person is part of the society. Being part of the society he has the right to learn and be educated in the society because this includes on the basic rights of every citizen. Moreover, the second part of the second principle is “attached to positions and offices open to all.”28This second part speaks of the arrangement of social institutions in order for inequalities and income work to the advantage worst off.29 In this part inequality 25 Ibid. 26 27 Ibid. http://plato.stanford.edu.edu/entries/rawls (Accessed November 11, 2009) Ibid 28 29 Ibid. 18 is permissible for the reason that wealth and income depends on the skill of every person. Similarly, all the members of soccer team for example, the privilege of being in the team. However, within this team each individual player has their own distinctive function for the proper organization of the team when they are in game. A striker for example cannot be a defender at the same time. The role of the striker should not go over the boundaries of his part in order for him to focus on his job as a striker and let also the defender fulfill his task as a defender. In this analogy it is understood that every member of the team enjoy and have the privilege to play but each individual have its own position. Similarly in the society each individual has the privilege to work in the society but the income or wages of every individual is not the same because of the fact that their wages depends on their work. In this principle it is understood how important to be attached in any opportunities that can be find in the society. The privilege to be employed in social institutions is not only for the rich and the middle class in the society but it’s for everybody. .3.2 Justice as First Virtue of Social Institutions Virtue is intrinsically in the mind of man. So much so he always seeks and desires the good. Justice in the words of Rawls is the key element in achieving social justice system, in his book A Theory of Justice he said, Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truths is of systems of thought.”30Thus it is the virtue mothering of all other virtues in the society. Implicitly Rawls would like to say that justice is never learned just by reading it but rather it is learned by doing and applying it. So much so that 30 Rawls, A Theory of Justice,3 19 in a society in order to judge it as just society the equal citizenship must be settled. As John Rawls puts it: Throughout I considered only as virtue of social institution, or what shall call practice. The principles of justice are regarded as formulating restrictions as to how practices may define positions and offices and assign thereto powers and liabilities, rights and duties. Justice as a virtue of particular actions of person I do not take up it all. It is important to distinguish these various subject of justice, since the meaning of the concept varies according to whether it’s applied to practices, particular actions, or person. These meanings are indeed, connected but they are not identical. I shall confine my discussion to the sense of justice as applied to practices, since this sense is the basic one. Once it is understood, the other senses should go quietly easy. 31 Moreover justice plays a very important role in every social institution. It is however established for the common good of every people living and working inside the society. So much so for a man who loves his virtue he will always practice it in order to become a person he wants to be. It is similar also to the society justice as the first virtue as Rawls would call it must be practiced in every social institution in order for it to become a just society. 3.3 Subject of Justice In this section the researcher will present the subject of justice which is one of the necessary elements in this study. Justice can be applied in different aspects of life. Further, people have different interpretation and understanding of it. However, in this case the subject of justice that the researcher is referring is the basic structure of the society. John Rawls believes that the subject of justice is the basic structure of the society as he puts it: The basic structure of society consists of the arrangement of the political, social, and economic institutions that make social cooperation possible and productive. These institutions have a profound influence on individuals’ everyday lives, their characters, Robert C. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings (New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997), 617-618. 31 20 desires, and ambitions, as well as their future prospects. The basic institutions that are part of the basic structure include, first, the political constitution and the resulting from of government and legal system that it supports, including the system of trials and other legal procedures; second, the system of property, whether public or private, that must exist in any society to specify who has exclusive rights to and responsibilities for the use of goods and resources. The system of property specifies the rights, powers, and duties that individuals and groups have with respect to the use and enjoyment of resources and other thing; third, the system of markets and other means of transfer and disposal of economic goods, and more generally the structure and norms of the economic system of production, transfer, and distribution of goods and resources among individuals; and fourth, the family in some form which from a political perspective is the primary mechanism any society must have for the raising and education of children and thus the reproduction of society overtime.32 The subject of justice is primarily the rights of every people and the basic structure of the society. The reason why the subject of justice is the basic structure of the society is because justice according to Rawls has a profound effect in the society. 33 Thus justice in this way must always apply in every structure of social institution of the society. The entire focus of justice is basically on the political and social justice. Moreover Rawls conception of justice starts from the special case of basic structure.34 Since it begins from the special case of basic structure it became the subject of his conception his concept of justice. 3.4 Rawls view on a Well-ordered Society Rawls viewed society as “more or less self-sufficient associations of persons who in their relations to one another recognize certain rules of conduct as binding and who for the most part act accordance with them.”35 A well-ordered is an ideal society for every 32 Freeman, Rawls, 101. Ibid., 7 Rawls, Justice as Fairness, 10. Rawls , Theory of Justice, 11 33 34 35 21 human person. However Rawls has his own view of what a well-ordered society is. Rawls characterized well-ordered “as one design to advance the good of its members and effectively regulated by a public conception of justice. Thus it is a society in which everyone accepts and knows that the others accept the same principles of justice, and the basic social institutions satisfy and are known to satisfy these principles.”36This is how Rawls viewed and characterized what a well-ordered society is. Moreover this concept on view of Rawls of a well-ordered society is very egalitarian, because the basis of justice practically pertains on the equality of all citizens in the society. It is evident that Rawls conception of justice is framed in this idea of a wellordered society. So much so Rawls conception of justice must be justified by the condition of human life.37 A well ordered-society according to Rawls is regulated by its public conception of justice. Since it is regulated by its public condition people got the courage desire in the society as what did the principle required. 38 With the two principle of justice presented by Rawls it is understood that man should be treated equally in the society according to their basic rights. In a well-ordered society this kind of treatment is practiced. However for further understanding of Rawls concept of a well-ordered society on the next discussion egalitarianism will be discussed on the next section. 3.4.1 Egalitarianism Egalitarianism is one of the most important elements in Rawls view of a wellordered. To understand more Rawls view on a well-ordered society it is necessary to 36 Ibid., 397. 37 Ibid. Ibid., 397-398 38 22 understand what egalitarianism is. “Egalitarianism, the view that all men and women are equally just by virtue of their being human is a position that must be urged and is not a ”natural” state affairs or a belief that was always accepted by everyone.” 39Thus egalitarianism basically lies on the concept of equality. These concepts basically advocate the equality between men and women. Sometimes people always say that men cannot be equated to women. It is because the first impressions to women are weak. However this concept argues that men and women are equal and the only thing that makes man distinct from one another is on the gender. Egalitarianism is powerfully represented in John Rawls view of a well-ordered society. Indeed a society that used to practice egalitarianism can be called as well-ordered society. Because of the mentality that everybody is counted as one, and thus, no discrimination between men and women. Moreover egalitarianism or equality is a relationship between people.40 A person finds justice in equality because they feel that they are counted as one. So much so people are happy when they know that there is no discrimination and equally treated in the society. 3.4.2 Egalitarian Society Rawls view on a well-ordered society can be characterized as an egalitarian society. However since the concept of egalitarianism was already discuss before proceeding to this discussion it would be easy then to understood what an egalitarian society is. An egalitarian society based its concept of justice on the equality of each person inside the society. Thus it is understood that each person is treated with equal respect both men and women there is no discrimination. Moreover an egalitarian society Robert C. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings (New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997),607. 40 Mackerlie, Equality, 274. 39 23 ought to be understood a complete equality among each member of the society or as raging over a person’s life as a whole.41 So much so an egalitarian society stresses the significance of the concept of social justice of equal treatment of people in the society. Indeed an egalitarian society is a picture of a well-ordered society. It is the idea of society was people find justice through equal treatment and satisfaction. Furthermore in an egalitarian society it always aims for equality to men. Moreover in an egalitarian society inequality is not bad but it is unfair. 42 It is unfair say for example that there are goods to be distributed to the people and it was not distributed equally. In this case there is a possibility that it would create conflict among people in the sense that other would get envy others because of what they have received and for sure they will compare the goods that they received from one another. However men are happy when they are equally supplied with equal resources.43 This is however the basis of justice in an egalitarian society. Moreover this idea of society can be seen in Rawls concept of a well-ordered society because every individual is counted as one. 41 Kai Nielsen, Equality and Liberty: A Defense of Radical Egalitarianism (United States of America: Rowman and Allanheld Publishers, 1985),46. 42 Mackerlie, Equality, 275 43 Ibid.,274. 24 Chapter 4 4.0 On Philippine Context 4.1 The Filipino notion of Justice Peoples have different understanding and different interpretation of what justice is. Hence, Filipinos have its own understanding of it. Thus, it is not surprising that Filipinos have its own notion of justice. This section will present how Filipinos understands and interprets what justice is. 4.1.1 Freedom According to history there were three foreigners who invaded the Philippines. These were the Spaniards, the Americans and the Japanese. Going back to the time of the Spaniards they stayed in the Philippines for almost three hundred years. Spaniards arrived in the Philippines in 1565. The purpose of the Spaniards is to colonize the Philippines to increase their colony in Southeast Asia, spread Christianity and introduce European civilization.44 During the Spanish period Filipinos were caught in a great dilemma. Filipinos suffered so much in the hands of the Spaniards. Spaniards has taken the freedom of the Filipinos to live freely in his own native land. They were even mocked and called as an “Indio”45. Jose Rizal, the national hero of the Filipinos known for his quotation, “Walang Beinvenido Lumbera and Cynthia Nograles-Lumbera, Philippine Literature: A History and Anthropology (Metro Manila: National, Book Store, Inc., 1982), 31. 44 45 The term “Indio” is used by the Spaniards to the Filipinos which means slave. 25 alipin Kung walang magpapaalipin”.46 In this quotation Rizal is trying to express his feelings about freedom for one’s own land. It is because during the Spanish period. freedom is obscure for the Filipinos. When the Filipinos tried and started the revolution against the Spaniards blood flowed and many died. However, after 332 years the Filipinos successfully escape from the chain of the Spaniards. However, it’s not yet the end of the quest for freedom because another colonizer came, the Japanese. The concept of justice during the Spanish period, were almost the same. Freedom is still. During the Japanese period Filipinos were humiliated and it seems that freedom is obscure once again. It is a remarkable event during the great battle in Bataan and Corregidor and the Death March. There were about 76,000 men imprisoned during war. Many died because they were sick, hungry and wounded. Prisoners walked for almost eighty kilometers and many died along the way.47 Because of the desire of Japan to colonize Philippines many died of the war. However, peace in the country can also be another concept of justice for the Filipinos. In this particular event we could see how Filipinos protect their land and they really seek for freedom. For Filipinos freedom is very important because this is the sign of a non humiliating society. 4.1.2 Liberty Liberty is one of the most important aspects in every Filipino citizen. Depravation of one’s liberty is a kind of injustice to the Filipinos. Accordingly the textbook of the Philippine Constitution in Article III, Bill of rights Section 1 states that, “no person shall 46 http://www.joserizal.ph/fi09.html. (Accessed January 11, 2010). Monina A. Mercado, Great Filipino Battles (Parañaque Metro Manila: The Philippine Alliance Corporation-1979), 75. 47 26 be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of laws.”48 In this section it is clearly understood how liberty is so significant in every individual particularly to the Filipinos. Liberty is the basic right of every individual person in order to socialize inside the community or society. It is very important in very Filipino citizen because it is the basis of they can practice freely their rights in accordance with the law. When a person experience depravation of liberty, there is a tendency to react or revolt in any other way around like civil disobedience. This is very true for the Filipinos. Going back to what had happened in the EDSA Revolution during the time of the Marcos regime many Filipinos struggled to fight for their liberty in order to attain the justice they are longing for so long. This is one of the most remarkable events in the Philippine history that shows how Filipinos was so thirst for liberty due to the fact that their liberty was deprived and not recognized rightly. It is clearly stated in the Philippine Constitution that depravation of one’s liberty is against the law. But what did the political leaders do. In this context we can see how liberty was so significance for the Filipinos that even up to death they will struggle just to attain liberty. 4.1.3 Social Justice What is social justice? Social justice is a broad idea. Many people interpreted it in different ways. Every individual has different understanding of it. However, Filipino people have also their own understanding of social justice. According to Jose W. Diokno49, in his essay “A Filipino concept of justice” which was published in Solidarity Ray S. Naguit, Discourse on the 1987 Philippine Constitution: A textbook on Philippine Constitution and Government (Bulacan, Bulacan: Gintong Sinag Publishing, 2002), 175. 49 Jose W. Diokno was greatly influenced by American Philosopher John Rawls especially in 48 27 Magazine in this magazine he presented the best definition of social justice for the Filipinos. As Diokno puts it: Social justice, for us Filipinos, means a coherent, intelligible system of law, made known to us, enacted by a legitimate government freely chosen by us, and enforced fairly and equitably by a courageous, honest, impartial, and competent police force, legal profession and judiciary, that: first, respects our rights and our freedoms both as individuals and as a people; second, seeks to repair the injustices that society has inflicted on the poor by eliminating poverty as rapidly as our resources and our ingenuity permit; third, develops a self-directed and selfsustaining economy that distributes its benefits to meet, at first, the basic material needs of all, then to provide an improving standard of living for all, but particularly for the lower income groups, with time enough and space to allow them to take part in and enjoy our culture; fourth, changes our institutions and structures, our ways of doing things and relating to each other, so that whatever inequalities remain are not caused by those institutions or structures, unless inequality is needed temporarily to favor the least favored and its cost is borne by the most favored; and fifth, adopts means and processes that are capable of attaining those objectives.50 In this concept of justice presented by Diokno it is quite clear how Filipino people understand what social justice is. Diokno arrives with this definition of social justice by observing what is happening in the Philippine society. He will not arrive at this definition of social justice if he does not experience nor observed that there are lots of social injustices happening in the country. He was not the only one who defines the meaning of social justice for the Filipinos yet there are also other Filipinos who define it but they were left unrecognized since they are not that familiar compare to Diokno. This implies that Filipino people has their own understanding of social justice based on how they experience and observe it in their daily life. http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20071215106988/A_Filipino_definition_of_social_justice (Accessed December 13, 2009) 50 28 4.1.4 Just and Humane Society What is a just and humane society for the Filipinos? According to the Preamble of the Philippine Constitution; “We the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society and establish a government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserved and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and under the rule of law and regime of truth, justice freedom love equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this constitution.”51 The Preamble in the Philippine Constitution advocates a just and Humane Society. More it carries the structure of society as the basis of justice. It probes that each citizen is secured by the law to what is written in the constitution. Thus the basis of just society is seen in a just and humane society. Ever human person for sure wants a just and humane society. However for the Filipinos this structure is what they want to be in the society. It is in this structure of the society where they find the just society. 4.2 Social issues in the Philippines as Hint of a non well-ordered society There are lots of social issues that can be considered hint of a non-well-ordered society in the Philippines. These are some of the issues that hinder the Philippine society to attain a well ordered society. 4.2.1 Rampant Corruption Corruption has been a problem in the Philippines for almost several decades already. Nowadays corruption is becoming more and more rampant. Because of corruption many Filipino people are suffering from poverty. According to the survey 35 51 de Leon, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution. 29 billion pesos lost in project anomalies.52 “The Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations at the Lower Chamber of the Congress said that the Philippine Government lost 21 Billion to graft and corruption stemming from scheming contracts entered into by senators and congressmen in 2001 and the amount of money lost to corruption involving projects executed by other government officials.”53 It shows the extent of graft and corruption that is happening in the country. It is a manifestation of how the country and its people are suffering from great loss. This is due to the fact that every act of corruption leads to the privation of the due amount of benefits that the people must receive from the government. Proper distribution of the money sustains government’s projects from health to infrastructure, to livelihood and education, peace and order and, etc. thus, a privation of these funds hinders the proper functioning of the government and the Filipino society as a whole. Corruption is only one of the many problems that the Filipino society is experiencing. But a more particular picture of the problem of the society can be seen through the situation of its people. According to facts, there are 15 million children who are malnourished in the Philippines. “In 2002 study conducted by the Philippine Congress, it showed that the about 15.6 million or more that 60 percent of the 25 million Filipino children (below 18 years old) were malnourished. In a separate study conducted by the Food and Nutrition Institute (FNRI), three out of 10 Filipino preschoolers were found malnourished or underweight in 2001.”54 52 http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/social.php. (accessed July 18,2009) 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid. 30 This sad reality is something that the Filipinos are experiencing. Such reality mirrors how the people struggle for the quest of survival. However, seeing this fact is much painful to see with the governments’ corruption at its background. Moreover, corruption today is becoming endemic in the Philippines. According to the former president of the CBCP Orlando Quevedo, Filipinos have been suffering for about six decades but corruption is not as bad as now and even elections for Sanguniang Kabataan is tainted with corruption. He even said “that is a terrible thing”55 More over he even received two letters on corruption. The first letter was during the term of President Corazon Aquino and the latest was during the years in office of President Arroyo. During the eight years in office, President Arroyo and members of his family have been dragged into many corruption related issues such as the $329-million national broadband network-ZTE deal and the P728-million fertilizer fund scam. But Quevedo clarified that “corruption is really endemic in the Philippines .It is (also) not the monopoly of one government. “ Quevedo, who is also the secretary general of the Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences (FABC), added that there are other countries experiencing the same problem. In fact, “the documents in the FABC and documents that would come out would mention the corruption is endemic in most governments or countries in Asia and not just the Philippines” he said.56 Corruption is really endemic in the Philippines. It shows the characteristic of a nonwell-ordered society. If only political leaders of the Philippines are not corrupt and honestly serving in the government perhaps this thing would not happened. As long as this problem continue to exist in the Philippine government it is really impossible to call it a well-ordered society. In the Philippines 55 it’s not only corruption that hinders its Evelyn Macairan, “Corruption in RP not as bad as now, says ex-CBCP official” The Philippine Star News, 16 January 2009,12. 56 http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/social.php ( accessed July 18,2009) 31 progress. There are other social issues to be adhered but what the government did is that they only show the good to people and they hide the truth. 4.2.2 Corruption Leads to Poverty Corruption is one of the worst form injustices among the people, particularly in a nation wherein democracy is being practice. It is a system that is hard to eradicate especially when it is rooted already in the governmental system. It is a crime against the nation because it can reach to the extent of little by little killing the people because of depravation of the basic services and needs of people that must be provided. One of its worst effects is poverty. According to the fact many Filipinos are living in poverty line the glimpse of hope seems to be obscure to many of the Filipinos due to the fact that there is only a very rare opportunity to earn a living that can sustain a family. Thus, it leads to many crimes that are rampant especially in the streets in Manila and even in some provinces. People who engage in this kind of activities blamed poverty because of the main reason why they compel in doing such a crime. The people could not be blamed. This is due to the fact that the government seems to be different in addressing this issues and neglecting the needs of others. For the past 26 years the rate of poverty remains unchanged. This is proven by the study conducted by the SWS survey which says that Thereafter, the following poverty episodes, all statistically significance, are visible in the SWS survey (quarterly since 1992): the trend in a percentage of Self-Rated Poor (SRP) was downward from 1985 to only 43 percent in early 1987; upward till early 1994, reaching 70 percent; downward till early 1988, going to 57 percent; flat till mid-2001; downward till mid-2004, to 46 percent; upward till mid-2006, at 59 percent; downward till the end of 2007, to 46 percent 32 again. It spiked up in 2008 to 59 percent again; and most recently settle down to 53 percent in September 2009.57 This reality is a clear manifestation that our nation is being caught up stagnant to poverty. If there is a political determination on the part of the government to alleviate the people who are living in such degrading situation, there must be already some changes on the state of living among the people. However, the problem is there is no initiative on the part of the government to do some actions in order to solve or at least to lessen this problem. Promises after promises have been uttered for the past two decades to address this problem. But reality speaks for itself “what the Filipino poor really need is not more economic growth (which actually hasn’t been of much benefit to them) but consumer price stability and upward flexibility of wages. Economic growth can hardly trickle down to the poor when the purchasing power of wages is going down.”58 This is what the people are hoping for and have been longing to have. However, none of this realization is being acted upon. Now, because of poverty millions of Filipinos are suffering from hunger. According to Sen. Francis Escudero millions of Filipinos are now suffering from hunger.59 This is the reality that we need to confront and must not be ignored. The Filipinos are hungry for justice and equality. While the poor became the poorest of the poor the politicians on the other hand are enjoying the luxury of eating with silver spoon in an atmosphere where the people are fighting for survival. 4.2.3Unemployment Mahar Mangahas, “Poverty’s the same after 26 years” Philippine Daily Inquirer, Opinion, 7 November 2009, A11. 57 58 Ibid. Evelyn Macairan, “Millions are now hungry” The Philippine Star, News, 25 July 2009, P2. 59 33 Unemployment is another hint of a non-well-ordered society. According to Trade and Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP), 26 percent of the college graduates are unemployed. To be more precise, 26.2 percent of college graduate aged 24 years old and below were unemployed.60 This survey shows how many Filipinos are suffering from unemployment. Nowadays a college graduate has a difficulty in finding job what more those who was not able finished their studies. It is sad to imagine but this is a phenomenon that happening in the Philippines today. In addition according to the news survey of the Enquire Monitor coming from the National Statistic Office, of the 2.8 million Filipinos unemployed as of April 2009 Labor Force, about half are 15 to 24 years old . While third are between ages 25 and 34.61 To be more understood here is the chart. 60 Ibid. 61 Kate Pedroso, “Most of Unemployed between 15 and 34 (In percent, April 2009)”, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 14 July, 2009, B1, together with the chart 34 Moreover it shows that most Filipinos are suffering from great unemployment. This is the reality present in the Philippines today. What is the government doing in this kind of situation? If this social problem continues to grow what would be the future of the Filipino families. Indeed this picture that Philippines is not a well-ordered society. 4.2.3 Conflicts in Mindanao There are numerous hints to prove that Philippine society is not well-ordered. One of those few hints are continues bloody conflict that is happening in some of the countries region, particularly in Mindanao. The war in Mindanao has a long history. The certainty 35 of the origin of the conflict cannot be traced anymore because of lone period of conflict that involves so many aspects of misunderstanding and clashes and ideology. 62 This continuous bloody conflict is affecting every individual particularly those who are living within the boundaries of the regions in Mindanao. This includes families who are forced to seek for the other settlements and worst children and youth who are caught in the cross fire of the clashing ideologies of the government and the rebels.63 This sad reality is being confronted not only by those people involved in the war, but by the whole Filipino society itself. It affects not only the development of the nation, but even its peace and order that is always being threaded by the relation of both clashing parties. Chapter 5 5.0 Evaluation and Application 5.1 Strengths and weaknesses One of the good claims of John Rawls concept of justice is his primary aim for a democratic society to set the most appropriate conception of justice. In setting the most appropriate conception of justice for a democratic society, Rawls presents the key elements and structure in attaining a well-ordered society. “Moreover, the fundamental aim of the conception of justice as fairness is to present principle that provides the most reasonable norms for guiding the political judgments of members of democratic society in exercising their responsibilities as citizens.”64 In this quotation the principles that 62 http://www.anakmindanao.com/content/view/202/45/ (accessed January 15, 2009) Ibid. Samuel Freeman, Cambridge Companion to Rawls (Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 87. 63 64 36 Rawls is saying is the principle of equal liberty and the difference principle of equal opportunity. Thus Rawls fits his conception of justice for a democratic society. He believes that the key elements in attaining a well-ordered society rest on the two principles of the conception of justice as fairness. For Rawls it is possible to attain the well-ordered society only if we follow the two principles articulated in justice as fairness. Furthermore the first principle Rawls speaks of equal liberty. According to this principle each person is to have maximum equal liberty.65 Every individual must be treated and respected equally according to their liberty. Moreover this principle must be satisfied first and the second principle automatically followed. Equal liberty is not liberty as such. For Rawls there are basic liberties that are basic one. These are the liberties of conscience, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of person including freedom of psychological oppression, physical assault, disembarrassment or integrity of the person, the rights to hold personal property, the right to vote, and freedom from arbitrary arrest.66 Liberty is very important to every individual. “By liberty, is understood according to the proper signification of the words, the absence of external impediments: which impediments, may oft take away part of mans power to do what he would: but cannot hinder left him, according as his judgments and reason shall dictate to him.”67 Liberty satisfies the nature of man. Man has the inclination to socialize within the society and as he socializes he must have something to hold on to 65 Ibid., 280. 66 Rawls, Theory of Justice, 53. Robert C. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings, 67 630. 37 protect his right and it was his liberty. Aristotle said “Man by nature is a social animal” 68 Being as such he needs to become to become just in order for him to live in harmony with others in a society. Thus he needs to become fair in protecting his liberty and others. Moreover the second principle automatically follows the difference principle of fair opportunity. This principle speaks equal fair opportunity. Every individual has the right to work for himself in the society to sustain his basic needs. The principle of fair opportunity pertains to those who are regardless.69 Thus this principle is designed for the worst off. Speaking of the worst of this are the people who are poorer than the poor. As human person they are part of the society and they are not disregarded less and they have the right to be accepted in any kind of opportunities that can be found inside the society. Like any other individuals they have the liberty too. The acceptance of works and economic opportunities are not only for the rich and the middle class in the society but poor must be included also as part of the society. Furthermore in this principle also Rawls stresses the significance of sharing one’s ability. Not all people are gifted.70 In order for man to be equal with others one must share his ability or skill in order to benefit the worst off or the least advantage and make use of it. Thus sharing one’s skill to another is a kind of justice to those who want to learn. Another good point to consider for Rawls conception of justice is his assertion on justice as the first virtue of the social institutions. In this assertion Rawls is trying to say that justice must be practiced and applied in every social institution. Like a man who Jean Verian, Made for Happiness Discovering the Way of Life With Aristotle, trans., Kathryn Spink ( Great Britain: Dorton, Longman and Todd Ltd., 2001), 128. 68 69 The term “regardless” pertains to the worst off people in the society 70 The word “gifted” refers to a certain talent or talented man 38 practiced virtue to himself in order to attain his goal in life, like justice as a virtue it must also be practiced and applied in order to attain the well-ordered society as the goal. Furthermore another good point to consider is his view on a well-ordered society. In a well-ordered society he asserts that it is a society regulated by the two principles without implying a broad conception of the human good.71 Rawls vision of a good society can be pictured in a well-ordered society. He believed that the two principles of justice can create harmony in every citizen as well as to the society. What is a Rawlsian good society? It is an order of harmony and cooperation which expressed through both institutions and personal relations among citizens sharing a commitment for justice. It is a space where people express their individuality through meaning labor, and more importantly, it is a society where disparities in the distribution of wealth are always seen with suspicion and leveled through state policies. Rawls stands for “a democratic regime in which land and capital are widely though not presumably equally held. Society is not so divided that one fairly small sector controls the preponderance of productive resources.72 This statement stressed the meaning of a good society according to Rawls. Moreover it pictures what a well-ordered society is. A well-ordered society is similar with the concept of decent society by Avishai Margalit. For Margalit a decent society does not humiliate people and a civilized society does not humiliate with one another.73 If there is humiliation happening among people it is not a sign of a decent society. Similarly with Rawls, he would claim that a well-ordered society is in harmony where every individual should be treated equally according to their liberty and basic rights. Moreover for Rawls inequality is not bad in the society but it is unfair. That’s why he came up with the conception of justice as justice as fairness. Thus in a well ordered Roberto Alejandro, The Limits of Rawlsian Justice (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press., 1997), 123. 72 Ibid., 24. 71 73 Margalit , The Decent Society, 1. 39 society treat every individual with equality according to their basic rights and it is in harmony with the two principles. On the other hand from the very beginning of the discussion of Rawls concept of justice in the society, Rawls gives to much focus on the equality of every individual in the society primarily in his Theory of Justice where can his concept of justice can be found. One of the destructing views of Rawls conception of justices his constant affirmation of absolute equality of every individual inside society. However the researcher finds this concept unattainable or obscure. In the first place Rawls presented a principle of justice that pertains to the equality of every individual but Rawls sets a limit and inequality is permissible. Thus how can it be absolute if there are exemptions? Another weak point to consider about Rawls conception of justice is it is limited only for a democratic society. “In the Preface to A Theory of Justice, Rawls indicates that one of his primary aims is to set forth the most appropriate moral conception of justice for a democratic society, a moral conception that was better suited to interpreting the democratic values of freedom and equality than the reigning utilitarian tradition.”74 Thus Rawls fitted his conception of justice for only a democratic society only. Thus it cannot be applicable to other forms of society. Moreover Rawls was criticized by Robert Nozick on his account of justice.” He argues specifically against Rawls, that a theory of justice should be structured to protect individual rights against state interference and should not promote pertaining arrangements that I affect redistribute economic benefits and burdens.” 75It is clear in this 74 Freeman, Rawls, 8. Tom L. Beauchamp, Philosophical Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1991), 375. 75 40 statement that Rawls theory of justice are not structured to protect the rights against the state interference Rawls was much focus his concept of justice on the equality of every individual. This is one of the weak points to consider in Rawls concept of justice. In Robert Nozick’s, Anarchy and Utopia he criticized Rawls saying, If things fell from heaven like manna, and no one had any special entitlement to any portion of it, and no manna would fall unless all agreed to a particular distribution, and somehow the quantity varied depending on the distribution, then it is plausible to claim that person placed so that they couldn’t make treats, or hold out for specially shares, would ate agree to the difference principle of distribution. But is this the appropriate ate model for thinking about how the things people produced are to be distributed.76 In this statement Rawls was accused by Nozick that he was thinking that social goods are like norms. Thus, for Nozick, Rawls has an incorrect thinking of what is meant by social goods. These are some of the criticisms of John Rawls theory of justice. 5.2 Application 5.2.1 Rawlsian Justice in the Philippine Context Philippines is indeed convoluted with so many social problems in the society. It can be said that it is not well-ordered due to the fact that many Filipinos are suffering from social injustices. However, the student-researcher presented some social issues facing by Philippines today that can be considered as hint of a non well-ordered society. The social issues such as corruption, poverty, unemployment etc. are but among the many problems facing the Philippines today that hinder its progression as industrialized country. These problems are not normal anymore for the Filipinos and it is already alarming. Nowadays, Filipinos are still in the realm for the quest of justice and hoping for a well-ordered society. But how the Filipinos will attain the well-ordered society that they 76 Ibid. 41 are longing for a long time, if the situation is chaotic? Indeed this problem already needs a most reasonable remedy. However, in this situation the question is will it be possible for Philippines to become a well-ordered society despite the fact that it is convoluted with so many social problems both economic and political. Hence the question on the possibility of having a well-ordered society in the Philippines is the focus of the student-researcher. With this scenario the studentresearcher wants to prove the possibility of having a well-ordered society in the Philippines by applying Rawls notion of justice. But how could it be? The Filipino people are hoping to have a well-ordered society yet there is a lacking elements why even until now it was not attained. Looking back of Rawls notion of justice it provides the key elements on the possibility of attaining a well-ordered society. Perhaps these key elements that Rawls are emphasizing are the lacking elements needed by the Philippines. Rawls was so much concerned in the justice system in the society particularly in a democratic society like Philippines. Philippines is a democratic society yet not wellordered for the reason that it is convoluted with so many social problems and anomalies in the government it is understood that there is a problem with regards to the justice system in the Philippines. In this kind of problem Rawls set the most appropriate principle for a democratic society in order to attain the well-ordered society. Hence, the most appropriate principles that Rawls is emphasizing is the two principles of justice articulated in justice as fairness. These are the principles of equal liberty and the difference principles. However, in order to justify Rawls notion of justice is applicable in having a well-ordered society in the Philippines the student- researcher will present the two principles in relation with the present problem facing by Philippines today. For 42 Rawls it is not possible to attain a well-ordered society if these principles is being followed and applied in every social institution. Similarly, in the Philippines if this principles is applied and followed perhaps it is not possible to have well-ordered society in the Philippines. However, it can be noticed that most of the social problems facing of Philippines today pertains to unequal distribution of wealth, depravation of liberty and unemployment. Hence, Rawls principle of justice practically concerned with these social issues present in the Philippines today. To justify Rawls notion of justice is applicable and let’s take the problem of corruption by the political leaders who are in authority. In the Philippines many Filipinos are suffering from great poverty because of corruption. According to Rawls justice is fairness, but what are the political leaders doing? Now the question is are they fair enough with the people? Probably it is evident that the answer is NO, due to the fact that they misused the funds intended for the people. They are using the money for their own good and neglecting the needs of others that they are supposed to serve. In this context Rawls notion of justice will aid this problem that is happening at present in the Philippines. According to Rawls every individual has the basic liberty and everyone must be respected according to the rights. However, this problem of corruption has something to do with Rawls principle of justice particularly the principle of equal distribution of wealth. According to this principle every individual must be given equal distribution of wealth and no one should take advantage. If this principle would be practiced and applied by the political leaders in the Philippines perhaps the tendency is that the case of poverty in the Philippines will be lessen. Thus, government leaders must give what is due to the people and must not sabotage it. According to Rawls a just society 43 gives an equal distribution of wealth to the people. An equal distribution of wealth is a matter of justice. Moreover, Rawls considered justice as first virtue of the society. Thus must be practiced and applied. Similarly, it must be applied and practiced also in the Philippines, particularly by the political leaders and every individual Filipino citizen to create harmony to each and every one as well as in the society. Thus, if these principles are being followed there is the possibility that Philippines will progress and will have a wellordered society. Indeed this problem facing by Philippines today needs a most reasonable solution. However the student researcher attempt to use Rawls concept of justice. But how could it be valid? Rawls provides the most reasonable principle for a democratic society that the student researcher would like to prove that it is effective. The hints presented by the student researcher however pertain to inequality. Looking at Rawls concept of a well-ordered society it is described as regulated by the two principles namely the principle of liberty and the difference principle. Rawls asserts that if these key elements which are the two principles it is not impossible to attain the well-ordered society. Similarly also in the Philippines if this conception of justice by Rawls be applied and followed the key elements in attaining the well-ordered society there is a possibility that Philippines will progress. Thus Rawls conception of justice will lead the Philippines to become a well-ordered society. 44 Chapter 6 6.0 Conclusion Rawls notion of justice provides the key elements of attaining a well-ordered society. He claims that egalitarianism or equal treatment of every individual is necessary in attaining a well-ordered society. For Rawls a well-ordered society is in harmony with justice. Every human person desires what is good for him. Thus, the ultimate goal of man in life is happiness and satisfaction. As human person man does not want to be treated unjustly nor humiliated by others. Indeed, this is very true in man’s life. Justice however, is established for the common good of every individual in the society. It is design to protect the right of every person. Justice plays a very important role in the society. Rawls asserts that justice should be the basic structure in the society. However, justice is not only for the rich but for everybody. Equal treatment of every individual in the society is very necessary. Without justice perhaps, society is chaotic. One of the good claims in 45 Rawls conception of justice is his assertion that justice should be the first virtue of every social institution. Hence, justice as a virtue it is essential to maintain the well being of the society. That is the equality among the individual in order to avoid any impediments which is mostly the cause of inequality. Justice is considered as a virtue, because it must be practice and applied inside the society. However, in the discussion of the student-researcher he claims that the Philippines is not a well-ordered society. This is proven through gathering of facts from news and reliable networks. The student-researcher points out why the Philippines is not wellordered due to the fact that corruption and unemployment can be considered of a non well-ordered society. Furthermore, after evaluating Rawls conception of justice and applying it in the Philippine context, the student-researcher would like to say unless we don’t practice the virtue of justice in the society, it is obscure to have a well-ordered society. The society and its people will still continue to struggle in order to find justice in the society which in time creates further chaos, like civil disobedience, rebellion, and to the extent of revolution. If justice is not practice there is a tendency for the people to seek justice in any means. Thus, this creates further division and trouble that hinders progress in the society. Looking back in the Philippine context for the past three centuries, starting from the preSpanish period up to the present, the Filipino is still struggling in search for justice. However, this is not being recognized because the society is lacking in the promotion of justice that will help in order to attain equality among the people. 46 The Filipino people desire a well-ordered society but justice seems to be obscure especially among those people who do not have the material means to protect their rights. In situation like this Rawls concept of justice, if it is going to be applied the extent of inequality in our society will be lessened and thus it will open the path towards a better life in the society in which justice is practice. In this context the student-researcher would want to say that all the individual have the role to practice justice. This is due to the fact that this will help attain a compact society which in Rawls view is a well-ordered society. This situation is like a family, wherein justice is practice and inequality is avoided. Thus, it promotes a greater bond in the family. However, the student-researcher agreed with Rawls in his claim that justice is the key principle in order to attain the well-ordered society. These are the principles of liberty and the difference principle. The former promotes equal liberties among the individuals living in the society. It values the rights of the person to exercise their freedom and protects their integrity as a human being. The latter has the twofold function. First, it includes the equal opportunity among its members either in education or economic opportunities. Second, it promotes the individual rights to have an equal opportunity in having a work that will sustain their daily needs. However, this is important for each individual in the society to have a reasonable to sustain themselves and their family. Lastly, the student-researcher, found out that Rawls notion of justice can be the key elements in order to attain a well-ordered society in the Philippines. Hence, if the basic elements will be practiced and applied in the Philippine context there is a possibility of attaining it in our society. After presenting the necessary elements in John Rawls 47 concept of justice the student researcher would like to conclude that Rawls concept of justice will lead the Philippines to attain a well-ordered society.