Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackPhilosophy/status/478076427506810881
2 tags, blockquote, title
source | link

Rawls seems partial to the idea of eugenics, as perhaps this is the corollary of the difference principle. Am I correct in this understanding?

  I refer to p.92 of A Theory of A Theory of Justice (1999)" "In the original position, then, the parties want to insure for their descendants the best genetic endowmentA Theory of Justice (assuming their own to be fixed1999). The pursuit of reasonable policies in this regard is something that earlier generations owe to later ones, this being a question that arises between generations. Thus over time a society is to take steps at least to preserve the general level of natural abilities and to prevent the diffusion of serious defects. These measures are to be guided by principles that the parties would be willing to consent to for the sake of their successors.":

In the original position, then, the parties want to insure for their descendants the best genetic endowment (assuming their own to be fixed). The pursuit of reasonable policies in this regard is something that earlier generations owe to later ones, this being a question that arises between generations. Thus over time a society is to take steps at least to preserve the general level of natural abilities and to prevent the diffusion of serious defects. These measures are to be guided by principles that the parties would be willing to consent to for the sake of their successors.

Rawls seems partial to the idea of eugenics, as perhaps this is the corollary of the difference principle. Am I correct in this understanding?

  I refer to p.92 of A Theory of A Theory of Justice (1999)" "In the original position, then, the parties want to insure for their descendants the best genetic endowment (assuming their own to be fixed). The pursuit of reasonable policies in this regard is something that earlier generations owe to later ones, this being a question that arises between generations. Thus over time a society is to take steps at least to preserve the general level of natural abilities and to prevent the diffusion of serious defects. These measures are to be guided by principles that the parties would be willing to consent to for the sake of their successors."

Rawls seems partial to the idea of eugenics, as perhaps this is the corollary of the difference principle. Am I correct in this understanding? I refer to p.92 of A Theory of Justice (1999):

In the original position, then, the parties want to insure for their descendants the best genetic endowment (assuming their own to be fixed). The pursuit of reasonable policies in this regard is something that earlier generations owe to later ones, this being a question that arises between generations. Thus over time a society is to take steps at least to preserve the general level of natural abilities and to prevent the diffusion of serious defects. These measures are to be guided by principles that the parties would be willing to consent to for the sake of their successors.

1
source | link

Can Rawls justify eugenics?

Rawls seems partial to the idea of eugenics, as perhaps this is the corollary of the difference principle. Am I correct in this understanding?

I refer to p.92 of A Theory of A Theory of Justice (1999)" "In the original position, then, the parties want to insure for their descendants the best genetic endowment (assuming their own to be fixed). The pursuit of reasonable policies in this regard is something that earlier generations owe to later ones, this being a question that arises between generations. Thus over time a society is to take steps at least to preserve the general level of natural abilities and to prevent the diffusion of serious defects. These measures are to be guided by principles that the parties would be willing to consent to for the sake of their successors."