Classical utilitarianism argues that the basic moral value is utility
or welfare. The basic moral good in this sense is that which is most
beneficial. As such, the moral act is one that is aimed at the
achievement of material satisfaction or gain. The human person, in
this regard, is only secondary. The right act is always the achievement
of the optimum benefit. This undermines the basic moral worth of the
person, for ultimately, the person can be used in order to achieve
maximum utility.
John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice is a response to utilitarianism. In
this work, he attempts to reconcile freedom and equality. The idea,
precisely, is to value each person as equals while, at the same time,
respecting their basic autonomy. The establishment of the basic
structure, for Rawls, does fulfill this ideal. According to Rawls, “justice
is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of
thought.”1
Rawls, who belongs to the social contract tradition of Kant and
Rousseau, develops his theory of justice from what he calls the
original position, a device in which “all parties choose the principles
of justice from behind a veil of ignorance.” The veil of ignorance
ISSN 0118-1521 (Print)
Philippine E-Journals
