Seite 26 [26]
IZOLDA TAKÁCS: THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY
If Rawls’ abstract theory of justice is taken as a basis, it can be deduced that
“First: each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of
equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others.
Second: social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are
both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and (b) attached
to positions and offices open to all.””?
So, Rawl’s second principle was based on the fact that people are not the
same, their cognitive abilities, talents, economic, cultural and social back¬
grounds are different. Therefore, equality must not be enforced by suppressing
disparities, i.e. the distinct characteristics.*° In this sense, Rawls’ statement
may also be related to that of Edgar Morin.
According to Morin, we must accept the paradigm that links “the idea of
human unity to the concept of difference, and theories that are capable of
interpreting human unity and human differences at the same time.”?! This can
be seen as the only way in which justice and equal opportunities can be for¬
mulated along with this inclusive concept.
In addition, Morin explained that we need to understand that there are
bioanthropological conditions (the capabilities ofthe human brain), socio-cul¬
tural conditions and neological conditions.” These, in turn, allow the “real”
questioning of the world and of human knowledge (such as the collision of
relative truths and values by Kelsen). We can see even in Hart’s argumentation
that the same theorem, i.e. to question the belief in the immutability of par¬
ticular norms, was also essential from the perspective of progression. This is
what the lawsuit itself is intended to serve with its adversarial structure, which
is a practical manifestation of the clash of values.
Positive jurisprudence — Kelsen in particular — connects diversity to the
idea of justice in a way that the social order imposing rights and obligations
on a person must disregard some, but not all, differences. In his view, the de¬
cisive question is which differences need to be considered and which do not.”
This can be the basis for the theoretical issues of equal treatment and can also
provide a framework for positive discrimination.
Let’s start with the fact that social actors are fundamentally different. How
can a fair system be created to the benefit of all?
Perhaps Rawls’ theory of justice has given the most comprehensive answer.
According to him, we can only speak of a just social order if any post, position,
rank, office is open to all, and advancement in income, wealth or power is also
29 Rawls: A Theory of Justice, 53.
30 T6éth: John Rawls, n.d.
3! Morin quoted by Barcsi: Az emberi méltóság filozófiája, 11.
32 Morin, E. (1999): Seven complex lessons in education for the future, https://unesdoc.unesco.
org/ark:/48223/pf0000117740 (accessed 12 December 2019), 11-12.
33 Kelsen: Mi az igazságosság?
s 24 e