Paste your essay in here…A just society is a society where everyone has equal opportunity and the same basic human rights. In this kind of society, no inequalities exist. Even though everyone may have the same rights, they do not necessarily hold the same positions. Each person in a just society plays a different substantial role. Some of these roles may be a mother, brother, teacher, student, doctor, and many more. Each of these roles hold different values and characteristics. For example, a mother may hold the value of nurturing her children. Even though each person plays a different role, there are aspects that all people interested in a just society have in common. Although majority do, some people however do not agree with these aspects and therefore display uninterest in a just society. We should morally evaluate someone who is uninterested in a just society based on their moral expectations, ability to follow just laws, and their relationship with others.
People in a just society are expected to follow certain moral expectations. Moral expectations are aspects of society that are expected of you as a well-rounded citizen. For example, citizens are expected to be honest and trustworthy at all times. Telling lies and being untruthful is not healthy for relationships in a just society. Another example of a moral expectation is to treat everyone with fairness. As written by John Rawls in The Original Position, “For given the circumstances of the original position, the symmetry of everyone’s relations to each other, this initial situation is fair between individuals as moral persons” (Rawls 128). Rawls makes the claim that fairness must be present between people in order to have a just society. To create this perfect fairness between each person, people must treat their neighbors fairly and without bias. The last example of one’s moral expectation in a just society, is to abide by the law. According to Martin Luther King Jr., “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws” (King 3). Abiding by the law is both a huge moral responsibility and expectation in a just society. As King said, following just laws is not just a legal responsibility but a moral one too. Obeying and enforcing the law ensures society operates properly and no errors occur. Overall, moral expectations are expected of citizens who live and hold interest in a just society. If someone does not demonstrate these moral expectations, they should be evaluated as unjust members of society.
In addition to moral expectations, people of a just society are also expected to follow just laws. A just law is a man-made law, also known as a moral law. Someone who is uninterested in a just society should also be evaluated based on their ability to obey these laws. In Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s well known writing, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail “, he states that “A just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself” (King 4). King explains a just law as something that the minority follows as a result of the majority urging them to do so. However, he then explains that the majority follows just laws in response to the minority doing so. A just law is a set of laws that society as a whole, no matter your wealth, must act in accordance with. An example of a just law in our society today is the unlawfulness of prostitution. Prostitution is both morally and, according to the government, legally wrong. According to John Rawls, “…A society is a more or less self-sufficient association of persons who in their relations to one another recognize certain rules of conduct…these rules specify a system of cooperation designed to advance the good of those taking part in it” (Rawls 126). These rules of conduct Rawls is speaking of are just laws. Just laws are not only vital in the relationship between citizens in a society but also vital in the advancement of society as a whole. Someone who is uninterested in a just society should be evaluated based on their ability to follow just laws because these laws are what makes a just society equitable.
People who are uninterested in a just society should not only be evaluated based on their moral expectations and ability to follow just laws, but also their relationship with others. To live in a just society, citizens are expected to collaborate together to keep society moving. This collaboration leads to relationships built between citizens that are independent of the state. According to philosopher Al-Farabi, “Human beings not only have a natural duty towards themselves, but also towards society… contributing both to the proper functioning of their society and to the happiness of the ‘organism cosmos’ and its various parts” (Germann). Strong and steady relationships are a must in a just society to ensure proper functioning. As Al-Farabi stated, humans have a responsibility to not only themselves, but those around them. Similarly, to Al-Farabi, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. also stated that humans must work together to accomplish success in a just society. “Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be coworkers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation” (King 5). In this quote, King describes the commitment that citizens of a society must have to make progress. Not only must they have a strong relationship with others, but also with God. If someone does not show interest in a just society, we should evaluate the way they interact with others. By observing their relationship with others, we can determine if they are fit for a just society.
My proposed argument that we should morally evaluate someone who is uninterested in a just society based on their moral expectations, ability to follow just laws, and their relationship with others; may be objected by some. However, I find my argument compelling. A philosopher who might particularly challenge my argument is Iris Marion Young. Iris Marion Young’s writing, “Political Responsibility and Structural Injustice”, may be specifically used as a counter argument. In her writing, Young discusses how citizens of a society should understand their responsibilities to approach injustices. In her counter argument, Young may argue that political responsibility is more than just abiding by moral expectations, following just laws, and maintaining a strong relationship with others. In her writing she says that political responsibility is “phenomena and movements of collective action, where people work together to form public works and institutions” (Young 11). Young may claim that even if someone followed all of the aspects I introduced, we may still end up with societal problems and a contribution to injustices. This is an interesting point to make. I agree that to eliminate structural injustices we must work together. However, I do not see how injustices may be created if we live in a society where we specifically follow just laws. Just laws firmly lay moral laws that citizens must abide by, and therefore, prevent injustices from arising in society. If someone were to find a way to construct injustices in a just society, they should be permanently removed. After all, they clearly were not abiding by the just laws of a just society.
For a just society to work properly, everyone must show interest and put forth individual effort. Although majority of citizens may show interest in a just society, there will always be some people who do not. We should morally evaluate those who are uninterested in a just society based on their moral expectations, ability to follow just laws, and their relationship with others. These three aspects together make a just society just. Without them, a just society would not operate efficiently and would ultimately fail.