To every single country in the world, justice and righteousness among its citizens have become one of the top requirements. Psychologically, human instinct prefers fairness, in another way, people consider being treated equally as an instinctive demand. Therefore, justice during social’s establishment is a manifestation of impartiality as well as an inviolable privilege. To protect justice, societies build up laws and regulations to treat people fairly.
The differences between history and cultural contexts generate different values, therefore, each society has its concept of justice. However, the general-purpose has always been to create a peaceful society where there are no vices, complexity or unscrupulous behaviors. Righteousness is all about learning how to survive and live in a manner that allows people to respond appropriately to the principles of their relationships which might include the relationships between family, colleges, and friends, it is about how to form our morality. Paradoxically, sometimes decisions have to be made between righteousness and peace, whether living with seemingly no difficulty or having all individual rights. There can be peace without righteousness, and righteousness without peace, but it is uncommon to have both at the same time. In reality, there was never peace, among the history of any culture on any continent from thousands of years ago. There are many theories of justice, which seem to guide people to a better life, but to all intents and purposes, they are hard to achieve.
Regarding the theory of John Rawls, it states that humans all have their liberties, additionally, individual freedom best can be restricted by the need to strengthen other’s freedom. Generally, the entirety might be impartial handiest when they are appropriate. Rawls proposes a model of justice idea that makes more sense from a liberal perspective. This has become a dispute about whether to treat human beings who have the same contribution or treat people differently in line with disabilities, educational level, and different living conditions. For instance, doctors with the same level of qualifications and the same number of years of dedication must receive the same salary, however, it cannot claim that the salary of a long-time dedication doctor must be equal to that of a new nurse. The general idea of Ronald Dworkin’s theory is to urge eliminate the concept that equal resources mean that equal results. A crucial component of Dworkin’s liberalism is equal attention. Dworkin introduces two criteria to limit things that are the principle of equal price and the principle of special responsibility. Relating to “equal attention”, it means that one ought to be treated otherwise to create them a lot of equal. In alternative words, this is often regarding respecting the specificities and potential variations of every people. Everyone should be placed in a very position to confirm that their lives are not wasted.
Within the exercise of one’s freedom, the individual is that the master of one’s can and so changeable for one’s life decisions. It is possible to imagine that people will make different choices and therefore their resources will be different without this leading to injustice. Furthermore, the individual can only be responsible for what they wanted in their project and not for hazards. Typically we tend to make choices that we think our own, however that are strained by context. The special responsibility obliges us to form our selections. Conversely, it is essential to predict the circumstances of people who find themselves in conditions of injustice to make them less unequal. Regarding the main aspects of Dworkin’s theory, he differentiates between external and internal resources. External resources are the social and economic resources that are outside the individual, and internal resources are items that refer to the person, for instance, natural talents or physical ability. Therefore, they must organize themselves in society and determine how to allocate the island’s wealth. However, what do we do with stuff that is not an option but bad luck? And with the idea of insurance, he addresses the issue. People will decide what they are willing to put into some kind of insurance fund that should give them a hand in case they fall ill. This also includes the unique responsibility of each individual. If we do not want to protect ourselves against the bad luck, we will have to keep track of the good funded by others at some point in time, but without helping to fund them as well. At last, treating people with equal attention often involves exerting great effort on the part of society as well as endeavoring as much as possible to at least alleviate their situation.
To sum up, the theory of justice according to Ronald Dworkin states that people are responsible for their choices except for the one caused by disabilities, additionally, no matter in what extent, all human beings have to be treated impartially. Being aware of this concept might partly change the way people behave among each other, simultaneously, construct a society without injustice.