Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Reciprocity: Reciprocity is the exchange of something between two or more people or groups, with each side giving or doing something for the other. See also Cooperation, Community, Actions, Justice._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
John Rawls on Reciprocity - Dictionary of Arguments
I 103 Reciprocity/Rawls: For example, two representative people in a society, A is less, B is more favoured. A can accept the benefits that come with B if this improves its own expectations. If B weren't in position, A would be even worse off. This presupposes a scheme of social cooperation without which no one would have a satisfactory life. Differential principle/Rawls: ensures that everyone agrees to this cooperation. >Difference Principle/Rawls. I 291 Reciprocity/Saving/generational justice/Rawls: generations should ask themselves how much they are willing to save when all others do the same. In doing so, they should establish a principle of fair saving that applies to all. I 288 Only the relatives of the very first generation do not benefit from this, but nobody knows in the initial situation of a society to be established which generation they belong to. I 290 Reciprocity/Rawls: The principle of reciprocity is usually used when it comes to compensating for advantages. But you cannot give anything back to the previous generation. This is the special case for reciprocity in saving. I 291 Alexander Herzen and also Kant complained about the injustice that the later ones would benefit from the achievements of the former ones without giving anything back. RawlsVsKant/RawlsVsHerzen: these feelings are out of place: the relation is asymmetric, but this has to be corrected. First of all, the question of justice does not arise because of the extension of time in only one direction. What can be fair or unfair is the way in which institutions deal with this situation and with historical possibilities. If all generations, with the exception of the first, now benefit and everyone inherits from their ancestors, all they have to do is choose a fair saving principle that ensures that future generations will also benefit from their services. The only reciprocity between generations is virtual. However, each generation can regulate the details for itself. I 292 Solution/Rawls: To accept individuals as part of a family line that continues. The rest is governed by the two principles of justice. I 293 No disadvantaged person of any generation can then complain that others are not doing their part. People of different generations share duties and obligations as well as contemporaries. The present generation cannot do what it likes, but must behave in the manner prescribed by the principles that would be chosen in the initial situation where no one knows what role they themselves play._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Rawl I J. Rawls A Theory of Justice: Original Edition Oxford 2005 |
||
> Counter arguments against Rawls
> Counter arguments in relation to Reciprocity
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-18