Theory on Justice

The theory of justice is a work of political philosophy and ethics by John Rawls. According to Gomez, philosopher John Rawls who lived between 1921- 2002, argued the notion of social justice as fairness in his book “A Theory of Justice. ” He used foundations of utilitarian and Kantian philosophy to create a possible technique to estimate the ethics of social and political institutions. The principles of justice theories was Rawls’s theory and it is dependent on two important and central principles of social justice that, according to Rawls, assures a just and morally acceptable society.

The first principle of social justice states “every person has a right to the most basic liberties, same as any other person who has a right to the same liberties. ” The second principle of social justice states “all people should have access to the same social and economic positions and be able to take advantage of them”. According to Areson, utilitarianism is the principle Rawls reputes as the most difficult form and type of teleology, which he describes as a theory that not only expresses the good as independent from the right but states and identifies the right while maximizing the good.

Utilitarianism usually is taken as a theory of justice and holds that “society is rightly ordered, and therefore just, when its major institutions are arranged so as to achieve the greatest net balance of satisfaction summed over all the individuals belonging to it”. Rawls argues that utilitarianism discounts the separateness and clearness of persons and does not recognize that justice is what free persons would choose as the principles to order or control their social cooperation under terms and situations that are fair. The virtue of caution involves an individual to be impartial in making decisions that affect all of the times of her life.

A benefit at one time should count the same as an identical benefit that could instead be gained at another time, and the same with losses. Rawls follow-ups that utilitarianism spreads the required impartiality across all persons. A benefit or loss for a person should amount the same, in the purpose or reason of what should be completed, as a same-sized benefit or loss that would transpire any other person at any other time or at any other place. The risky impartiality built into utilitarian thinking may sound moral, honorable or ideal, but Rawls finds it problematic.

Rawls treats utilitarianism as a candidate theory of justice for the regulation of major institutions. It is usually taken to be first and foremost a theory of right action. Roughly speaking, utilitarianism holds that morality should direct conduct in such a way that the outcome is best for people on the whole. According to Staib, Criminal justice is the arrangement of practices and institutions of governments focused and aimed at maintaining social control, preventing and mitigating crime, or sanctioning those who violate laws with criminal penalties and rehabilitation efforts.

Those accused of crime have safeguards against abuse of investigatory and prosecution powers. Criminal justice represents the policies involving law enforcement, including all legal procedures and processes designed to encourage proper implementation, through impartial treatment, as intended by society. Essentially, criminal justice, in its strictest and harshest sense, means nothing more than “criminal or penal law, the law of criminal procedure,” particularly all activities involving its “enforcement.

” Basically, criminal justice communicates to the concentration of law that focuses on crime, controlling, minimizing, and mitigating its manifestation. Crime, as defined, denotes the act of committing a public wrong, or violating one’s public commitment thereof, as deemed appropriate by society. Crime has occurred and existed since the beginning of humanity, and laws serve to protect people from harm in material, democratic societies; otherwise, anarchy and civil disorder almost inevitably results.

Therefore, to prevent or discourage widespread violence and insurrections, governments institute and establish laws that prohibit certain criminal conduct, or public offenses against society, as a means of protecting good law-abiding citizens against harm. According to Litherland, the reason or purpose of the criminal justice system is to expose facts of violations of the law and to prosecute and punish the violators appropriately. Private security aids a purpose within the criminal justice system to deliver and offer extra eyes and ears to watch and report on criminal activity in designated areas, and to prevent that activity where possible.

In both of these areas honesty is a valued commodity necessary for the performance of duties. In the end security and justice differ. What are the differences between the two fields? According to Malone, criminal justice does not have the same “bottom line” as security management. The criminal justice bottom line is dignified in service, law and order. The security’s bottom line substances are revenue and the shareholder satisfaction. Therefore, the significances and urgencies of each area are different.

In criminal justice, due process, rule of law and obedience to the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights, along with thorough, fair investigations, are priorities. In the corporate security world, risk and liability, protection of corporate assets, to include data and status, and human resource and legal issues in organizations are priorities. For example, if an employee was found bilking or swindling a company of hundreds of thousands of dollars, a law enforcement official would inspect or investigate and bring criminal charges.

The security officer would be defied and challenged by a chief executive officer ot CEO, who would first regulate how awareness of the criminal activity might affect or touch the shareholders and the reputation and status of the company. If it is detrimental and harmful to the company to prosecute, the CEO might just fire or terminate the worker and hope the whole case goes away. The criminal justice field’s assets and strengths are understanding and knowledge of the law, the criminal process, and the investigation of a crime.

Private security comprehends crime prevention, risk management and cyber security. The Criminal Justice and Security Management Program builds on the powers of each side of the security house. Another example when a student takes the major courses of the degree, he or she understands the reasons why people commit crime, the management of the criminal justice system and corporate security, the principles of security, crime prevention and loss prevention, the safety sciences, constitutional and criminal law, evidence, and criminal investigations.

Works Cited Areson, Richard. “What Is RAWLS SOCIAL JUSTICE THEORY? ” What Is RAWLS SOCIAL JUSTICE THEORY? N. p. , Fall 2008. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://mrwhatis. com/rawls-social-justice-theory. html>. Gomez, Vivian. “John Rawls Theory of Social Justice. ” EHow. Demand Media, 04 Nov. 2010. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://www. ehow. com/facts_7446222_john-rawls-theory-social-justice. html>. Malone, Marita. “Professional Perspectives » Archive » Criminal Justice & Security Management: The Merging of Previously Separate Fields. “