Compare and Contrast Rawlsian and Dworkinian account of distributive justice - Essay Example

The focus in this methodology of viewing justice is on the outcomes and results of distributions rather than the procedural tools which connect with administrative bodies or the government established in the system. Two prominent thinkers, i.e. Ronald Dworkin and John Rawls have presented their ideas about distributive justice and an understanding of these ideas is important for any student of sociology, philosophy, law and even economics. It would be best to examine the ideas of Rawls first since he presented his ideas before Dworkin.

In the simplest of terms, John Rawls distributive justice is based on the idea of alternative distributive justice in which a Difference Principle is called into action. Rawls accepts that equality and equal distribution of resources within any given system is impossible therefore he creates a difference principle under which inequality becomes perfectly acceptable. The Difference Principle allows a society to allocate resources in a way where equality is not needed, but only if the creation of this inequality makes the lower strata of society materially better off than they would have been had there been perfect equality (Rawls, 1993).

As a difference to Dworkinian distributive justice, this idea is based on the fact that the level of wealth in an economy is never a fixed constant and it can be changed from one point in time to the other. Rawls suggests that the wealth of a nation can be created by technology, innovation and development and this has been clearly proven by the industrialized nations of the world. Of course this comes with the idea of capitalism and social Darwinism where the most productive people within an economy will rise to the top and create wealth for themselves as well as the economic system they are in.

This may lead to the accumulation of wealth at the top of the social order but Rawls does not consider this to be a