Question

Aristotle and Rawls have opposing views about the relation between justice and moral desert. What best characterizes the difference?

a) Aristotle argues that justice is giving people what they deserve, while Rawls believes that moral desert is irrelevant when it comes to a just distribution of goods.
b) Rawls argues that a distribution is just only if everyone gets what he or she deserves while Aristotle believes that a distribution is just if fair equality of opportunity is realized.
c) Aristotle believes that a distribution is just if everyone gets what he deserves, while Rawls believes that a distribution is just if and only if everyone gets an equal share.
d) Rawls argues that a distribution is just if the position of the worst off is maximized, while Aristotle believes that a distribution is just if the position of the worst off is minimized.
e) Aristotle believes that a distribution is just if everyone gets an equal share, while Rawls believes that a distribution is just if everyone gets what he or she deserves.

Answer 1

1

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer 2

The correct option is A: Aristotle argues that justice is giving people what they deserve, while Rawls believes that moral desert is irrelevant when it comes to a just distribution of goods.

Step-by-step explanation:

Rawls was dismissive towards the idea of moral desert whereas Aristotle believed that the distribution of goods should be done on the basis of merit. The two philosophers had their own line of logic and having differing point of views does not mean that they cancel out one another in any way.

Hope that answers the question, have a great day!