Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do?

Episode 07 consequentialist/ rule of utilitarian contracts bind us only if they are instruments of mutual benefit contract - not mutual exchange, but mere fact of agreement itself - A contract g enerates obligation (self-imposed) Contracts stand Ithe moral force behind contractS) because: a. consent based (obligation) b. reciprocity (mutual benefit) 2 types of contracts: a. consent-based b. benefit-basd e.g. unfaithful spouse. Angry cuz he violated the marriage (contracT). OR can be because you accrued your wife benefit (your faithfulnesss) but your wife is un faithful. Benefit is subjective/ may be intangible BUT a contract/ an agreement does not mean that it is FAIR moral limits of actual contracts - a contract/ an act of consent is not sufficie nt, but not even a moral obligation. If there is reciprocity -> contract can be done without agreemnent E.g. David Hume -> Argued against social contract Rejection of consent as basis of contract e.g. white the ideal of reciprocity may not be realised because: 1. Difference of bargainig power 2. DIfference of knowledge between parties - misidentify what benefit is Contract where the ideals of autonomoy and reciprocity were GUARANTEED TO BE rea lised hypothetical contract among equals under veil of ignorance Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 08: "WHATS A FAIR START?" (merito cracy) top colleges in us - 70% come from richest 10% - 3% come from poorest 10% Meritocracy (fair equality from effort/ contribution) BUT No one comes from the same starting point. No one has the same family backgr ound, Rawls - Moral arbitrariness of natural lottery, If everyone is from same startin g point, the fastest runners would win. Therefore, even if perfect meritocracy e xists, there will still be income/ wealth disparity due to the natural distribut ion of abilities and talents Even effort can come from fortunate family circumstances for which we can claim no credit

Even by birth order - is not an individual's doing. In harvard, 75-80% are first borns. Why should income and wealth and opportunities be based on factors that are arbitrary? Therefore there is a need to put sufficient incentives so the least well off sti ll benefit from what the CEOs, etc. can do to bring about greater good for socie ty (i.e. From the standpoint of incentives and disincentives on the well-being o f poorest people) Milton Friedman: Life is not fair. And it is tempting to believe that the govern ment can correct what nature has spawned