The Kantian Tradition and Rawls's Conception of Justice
The Kantian tradition can be traced back to Rawls's conception of justice. According to Rawls's detractors on the establishment of justice principles, referring to Rawls's viewpoint as Kantian is impossible. Both Rawls's and Kantian theories give a foundation for establishing right behavior. As a result, Rawls's can be translated as a means of interpreting Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Kant's moral reasoning. This explains why a person who evaluates what is ethically right cannot act immorally in a given scenario. Thus, proving the link between Aristotle and Rawls's Kantianism, concerning the just conduct motivation; it assists in understanding the Kant's perspective on morals. This can be realized using the words of Rawls such as mutual respect, morality, and self-esteem.
Rawls's View and 'Contractarianism'
Rawls's view considered 'contractarianism' because it argues that principles of a given group can guide a person's act. The group is composed of people who decide on the regional position because they are ignorant. Additionally, the theory decides upon the society's basic structure. This makes it unfit for formulating ethical principles.
The Exclusion of Children in Rawls's Theory
In the Rawls theory, children are excluded from the libertarian framework. According to the author, individuals in the original positions are family heads. Therefore, he says little about children concerning justice requirements. In the Rawls theory, it is also challenging to include children and make them part of a contract. It is argued that there is no association between rationality and children. It seems that Rawls is basing his argument on the fact that children are irrational, and this is also extended to other non-human animals. This is because it is believed that only human beings are rational.
