A Value or an Obligation? Rawls on Justice to Future Generations

David Heyd*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

This chapter reviews Rawls' attempt to address the theoretical problem of extending the principles of justice to future generations. It examines the two options suggested by Rawls for solving the problem: the 'general assembly' and 'the present-time-of-entry'. It argues that Rawls does not directly address the problem of the identity of future (possible) people, which means that the conditions for the inclusion of future people in the original position cannot be fully determined. Rawls wishes to offer a theory of just intergenerational distributions but it turns out that such a theory is logically dependent on the number and identity of future people, an issue which cannot itself be fixed in terms of an ideal contract under a veil of ignorance. The conclusion of the article is that the scope of the group in which the principles of justice are decided and implemented cannot itself be determined by a contractarian method.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationIntergenerational Justice
PublisherOxford University Press
ISBN (Electronic)9780191712319
ISBN (Print)9780199282951
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Sep 2009

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The several contributors 2009. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Circumstances of justice
  • Future generations
  • Identity
  • Impartiality
  • Original position
  • Rawls
  • Saving
  • Solidarity

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A Value or an Obligation? Rawls on Justice to Future Generations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this