The Research Of Rawls’ "moral Luck" Theory

On the basis of criticizing utilitarianism,Rawls put forward the theory of "moral luck" dedicated to the realization of social fairness and justice.Equal luck is inspired by the theory of "moral luck".It is acknowledging that luck is the cause of people’s On the basis of the important source of inequality,the principle of responsibility was put forward to make up for the deficiency of Rawls’ "moral luck" theory.It is precisely based on the close connection between the two that some scholars put Rawls into the sequence of luck egalitarians.However,some scholars have put forward the opposite view.They believe that although Rawls has an extremely important influence on the generation of luck egalitarianism,Rawls is not a luck egalitarian,at least not a luck egalitarian in the full sense.The basic idea of luck egalitarianism is to neutralize the influence of luck factors on personal life,that is,to offset the influence of all original luck on the individual.Its typical feature is to make individuals responsible for the results of their own choices through the most fundamental distinction between choice and environment,and ultimately achieve the goal of incorporating responsibility into equal value.Based on the idea of egalitarian luck,this article delves into Rawls’ theory of “moral luck” from three aspects: the content of luck,luck is not due to luck,and luck should be corrected,trying to find Rawls’ theory of “moral luck” and luck.Where egalitarianism fits.Then this article discusses the relationship between the two aspects from the perspective of the purpose of equality and the manifestation of equality.From the perspective of equality,Rawls and luck egalitarians both try to establish equality at the starting point,but the specific performance is different.The luck egalitarians aim to offset all the effects of original luck,while Rawls’ the "moral luck" theory aims to offset the impact of all luck on people’s lives.This perspective shows that Rawls is not a luck egalitarian.From the perspective of equality,luck egalitarianism makes a fundamental distinction between choice and the environment,and then incorporates personal responsibility into equality.However,from the inspection of Rawls’ "moral luck" theory,it is found that although Rawls’ attitude towards expensive hobbies seems to indicate that he recognizes personal responsibility,the principle of difference does not fully reflect personal responsibility in essence.In addition,on the issue of distribution,luck egalitarians are more inclined to the principle of compensation,while Rawls advocates the realization of justice in distribution through the principle of difference.Therefore,from the perspective of the manifestation of equality,Rawls is not a luck egalitarian either.Although Rawls is not proven to be an egalitarian of luck,the relationship between the two is inseparable.On the one hand,Luck egalitarian recognizes Rawls’ emphasis on moral luck.On the other hand,Rawls’ theory of justice does not really offset the bad influence of luck on people.This is mainly reflected in Rawls’ difference principle.Critically,on this basis,the equality of luck also proposed the principle of responsibility,which in a certain sense is also the development of Rawls’ "moral luck" theory.