John Rawls, a twentieth century political scientist and philosopher wrote “A Theory of

Justice”, based on the idea of a society composed of free citizens that holds equal rights and
opportunities, to answer the question on how society ensure that justice is offered to its citizens.
This work of Rawls, revolves around two fundamental principles that could be accepted by the
free and equal persons as a basis for a system of cooperation known as the society. The two
principles are the following: 1) each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of
equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme for all; this scheme the
equal political liberties, and only those liberties, are to be guaranteed their fair value. 2) Social
and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: first, they are to be attached to positions
and offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to
the greatest advantage of the least advantaged members of society. Moving on, this paper will
answer the question, “How important are institutions/structures in the overall manner on how
justice/equality can be achieved according to Rawls?”

The answer to the question stated above rests on Rawls work itself. He argues that in fair
structure of society there would be justice and with fair institutions people would be justly
treated. So he develop this kind of moral position that justice is fundamental to social
institutions. It is according to him that the basic structure of society is the primary subject of
justice and that justice serves as an asset to the interaction or cooperation of social institutions,
such as political system, economic system, and the family, that shape people’s life prospects.
Regulating the basic structure was the role intended to the principles of justice. Social justice
imposed duty to individuals to follow the rule of just institutions. Thus, this duties are said to be
ancillary. Also, his principle of justice promotes equality. This can be seen through fair equality
for opportunity, which is satisfied if opportunities are open to all according to the fitness of
individual to such opportunity.

Since it is hard to believe a theory without testing, Rawls develop two notions of testing
to support his argument. First is that the principle appear reasonable, to the extent that the
principle imply policies and outcomes for individuals that match our reflective judgments about
these matters. Second is that Rawls starting to gain fairness, so he set up this original position
argument, the idea of veil of ignorance, where everybody’s going to started out without knowing
who they are except general facts that social sciences provides, and in there we would see what
happens. Then he develop this argument that what comes out of this original position will be
acceptable afterwards. His conviction that to render his view acceptable he must defeat
utilitarianism, shape his original position argument. He greatly opposes to the idea of
utilitarianism that one ought always to choose that action or policy that maximizes the welfare of
society.

As Rawls sets up his original position argument, three arguments are considered: First is
the special circumstances of choice in the original position. Second, those who are in the
individual position are choosing for a well-ordered society in which everyone accepts and
complies with the principle chosen. Third, the parties that are supposed to be choosing principles
for public conception of justice. In the first argument, given the special circumstances of choice
in the original position, parties are encourage to rationally adopt Rawls’s principles because they
need to advance their interest. Next, individual position are choosing for a well ordered society
in which everyone accepts and complies with the principle chosen because they might be
constrained by the principle chosen and they likely want a principle where they could steadily
obey. In the last argument, parties are supposed to be choosing principles for public conception
of justice to rule out principles that are kept esoteric, meaning majority should be able to
understand and comply on it.

To end the discussion and to further have knowledge on how important institutions in
achieving justice/equality, Rawls wanted to have a discussion on stability. He thinks that his
theory is only acceptable if it can be shown that in a society regulated by his principle of justice.
 Reference

Dryzek, J. S., Honig, B., & Phillips, A. (2006). The Oxford handbook of political theory.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20130114522