This thesis shall examine two conceptions of justice, proposed by Rawls and Young respectively, and the society that flows from said conceptions, in order to evaluate them and conclude that they...Show moreThis thesis shall examine two conceptions of justice, proposed by Rawls and Young respectively, and the society that flows from said conceptions, in order to evaluate them and conclude that they are not able to resolve and prevent injustices. These philosophers are the focus of this thesis as they both attempt to measure and resolve injustice, with Rawls focused on equality and distributive issues whilst Young takes an approach based on resolving oppression by respecting group differences. Existing debates in political philosophy can largely be separated into two categories. Arguably the biggest debates are to be found in the category in which Young’s and Rawls’s work can also be found, revolving around the question of what the best possible society would look like. These discussions, however, assume that there is a satisfying answer to debates that fall in the other category, which includes all discussions surrounding the question of whether states are or can be good at all. By evaluating the societies proposed by Rawls and Young this thesis is situated in the first category of discussion, though avoids the assumption that a state is good or justifiable. Instead, this thesis will attempt to bridge the gap between the discussions by noting the injustices caused by these proposed systems of government, opening the door for the inclusion of anarchist philosophy in discussions about the best possible way to order a society.Show less
