John Rawls posits justice as fairness. He sees socio-justice as a fair distribution of benefits and burdens through a society. Hence, he came up with two principles. These principles talks about each person having equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others, and, also socio and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage and opportunities open to all.  Rawls’ principle simply directs us to the equal rights of every individual. This equality may be direct or indirect. His principles help to provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of the society and also define the appropriate distribution of benefits and burdens of social co-operation. Furthermore, his notice of justice goes beyond the happiness of the people, touches every area of man’s life and brings man to a better state of affairs. There is no denying that with Rawls theory of justice as fairness, there would be peace in the society. There is no doubt that this was the reason man willingly went into the socio-contract deal. Social justice should be seen as an integral part of the society, for only then can we have social order which is the dream of every society.  The aim of this project is to attempt a systematic and critical evaluation of the essence of social justice as a condition-sine-qua-non for social order.  To achieve this aim, I intend to analytically evaluate John Rawls principle of justice in relation to social order. 




Let’s begin this session with an historical review of how society came about. In looking at the historical background of society, we can get an understanding of what this project is all about, which is socio-justice as a condition sine-qua-non for social-order. There are various philosophers who spoke about the original position but I will make use of two philosophers apart from the main philosopher in this project which is John Rawls. The two other philosophers are Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. John Locke was convinced that in the original pre-political state of nature, people found that they needed to come together in order to protect their natural rights.1 While Thomas Hobbes says that in order for man to be free from fear of that fellow man and against chaos, man should be involved in what he called ‘social contract’.2 This means members of that group will submit to a sovereign in return for protection. 

According to John Locke, humans in the state of nature have perfect freedom to order their actions according to the laws of nature. Locke agreed with Thomas Hobbes that people could do so without having to ask permission to act from any other person because people are to have equal values.3 People only leave the stat of nature when they consent to take part in a community in order to protect their property and rights. John Rawls, the main philosopher of this project, was looking at the bigger picture which is a just society. He believed that anything that would make one surrender to a sovereignty and also come together is to form a just society is to cultivate their own common good and also protect their rights. He went on to postulate that this can be done through their choice of governing principles. He states two principles that he believes any rational individual would choose as the foundation of social justice. 


There are various definitions of justice, hence no universal definition of justice. Justice can not be seen from an objective view but it can be seen from the subjective and relative point of view comfortably. For instance, what is seen as justice for one person may not be seen as justice for another. Also, justice in a society may not be accepted as justice in another society. 


The purpose of this study is to throw more light on the foundation of socio-order with reference to John Rawls theory of Socio-Justice. 


This work will cover socio-justice according to John Rawls and how it serves as a foundation of a well ordered society. 


This study will create a better understanding of a well ordered society and the role of socio-justice in it. 


The methods of this study is going to be an analytical and critical review of Rawls’ work on Justice as Fairness 


The first book to be reviewed is authored by Peter J. King, titled One Hundred Philosophers: A Guide to World Greatest Thinkers. This fascinating book examines the live and thought of 100 philosophers who were the men and women we call the greatest philosophers who have changed the way we view the world.  The second book to be reviewed is authored by Philip Pettit, titled An Introduction to Contemporary Political Philosophers. This book fills in the background to the investigation of justice and offers a critical appraisal of the major competing theories.  The third book to be reviewed is authored by W.F. Lawhead, titled The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy; Second Edition. This book is intended to be used to introduce readers to philosophy for the first time as well as to provide a comprehensive survey of Western Philosophy. This edition is now available in the formers. It was philosophy from the early Greeks to the contemporary period. The fourth book to be reviewed here is authored by Kenneth Bruder and Brooke Noel Moore, titled The Power of Ideas, Fifth Edition. This edition incorporates several modifications they hope one will find well chosen, useful or apt. the book is straight forward, ungimmicky historical introduction to philosophy. It has always been an introduction that differs from many historical texts in containing separate historical overviews of the major branches of philosophy.