CBSE Class 11 Political Science Chapter 4: Social Justice NCERT Solutions

To give each person his/her due means to ensure the well-being of individuals and to give equal importance to all people. It implies that a just society or government is concerned with the welfare of its citizens, much like a doctor is concerned with the well-being of their patients.

Over time, the understanding of "giving each his due" has evolved:

1. Historically, ideas of justice have been debated since ancient times, such as by Plato.
2. Today, the focus is on what is due to each person simply by virtue of being human.
3. This includes providing opportunities for individuals to develop their full potential and pursue their chosen goals in life.
4. Modern interpretations emphasize that justice requires giving due and equal consideration to all individuals, regardless of their background or status.

The chapter outlines three key principles of justice that guide our understanding of fairness and equality:

1. Principle of Treating Equals Equally: This principle asserts that individuals who share certain fundamental characteristics, such as being human, should be treated equally and be granted equal rights. This includes civil rights like the right to life, liberty, and property, as well as political rights like the right to vote, enabling participation in political processes. Importantly, this principle also requires that people should not face discrimination based on factors like class, caste, race, or gender. For instance, judging individuals based on their capabilities is just, but discriminating by paying male teachers more than female teachers for the same work would be unjust.
2. Proportionate Justice: While equal treatment is crucial, it's not always sufficient. Sometimes, treating everyone the same from the same starting point can still lead to unjust outcomes. Proportionate justice suggests that rewards should be distributed in proportion to the scale and quality of an individual's effort or contribution. For example, while people doing the same work should get the same pay, it is considered fair to reward different kinds of work differently if factors like the required effort, skill level, or inherent dangers are taken into account. This principle balances equal treatment with fairness based on contribution.
3. Recognition of Special Needs: This principle emphasizes that a just society must consider the unique or special needs of individuals when distributing resources, opportunities, or duties. People with disabilities, for instance, might be considered unequal in a particular respect and thus deserving of special assistance to ensure they can participate fully in society. Factors like physical disabilities, age, or lack of access to good education and healthcare are often grounds for special treatment. In India, social discrimination based on caste often combines with a lack of access to education and healthcare, leading to constitutional provisions like reservations in government jobs to address these special needs and promote social justice.

The principle of considering the special needs of people does not necessarily conflict with the principle of equal treatment for all; rather, it can be seen as a way to achieve a more comprehensive form of social justice.

Here's why:

1. The goal of social justice is to ensure fairness and well-being for everyone. While the principle of equal treatment applies to those who are considered equal in relevant respects, recognizing and addressing the special needs of certain individuals or groups is crucial when they are not equal in those respects.
2. People with special needs, such as those with disabilities or lacking access to essential resources like education and healthcare, may require different treatment or additional support to achieve equitable outcomes. Treating them differently in specific ways can actually help promote justice by compensating for disadvantages.
3. For example, in India, the Constitution provides for reservations in government jobs and educational institutions for communities that have faced historical social discrimination and lack access to opportunities. This is a recognition of their special needs, aimed at bringing them to a level where they can be treated equally in other respects.
4. Therefore, if recognizing and addressing special needs is mandated by justice to correct imbalances and ensure fairness, it does not contradict the fundamental principle of equal treatment. Instead, it complements it by ensuring that equality is meaningful and accessible to all members of society.

John Rawls, in his theory of justice, uses the concept of the 'veil of ignorance' as a thought experiment to establish rational grounds for a fair and just distribution of societal resources and principles.

Here's how it works:

1. The Original Position: Rawls asks us to imagine ourselves in an 'original position' where we are about to decide the basic principles that will govern our society.
2. The Veil of Ignorance: Crucially, in this original position, we are behind a 'veil of ignorance.' This means we do not know any specific facts about ourselves or our future place in society. We don't know our gender, race, class, wealth, talents, abilities, or even our personal conception of the good life.
3. Rational Self-Interest: Rawls argues that rational individuals, seeking to protect their own interests, would choose principles that are fair to everyone, especially the least advantaged. Since we don't know if we will be rich or poor, privileged or disadvantaged, healthy or unhealthy, we would rationally choose principles that ensure a basic level of fairness and security for all, just in case we end up in the worst-off position.
4. Just Principles: For example, we would likely agree on principles that guarantee basic liberties for all and ensure that any social or economic inequalities are arranged so that they are to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged and attached to offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. This rational choice, made under conditions of ignorance about our own specific circumstances, provides a strong justification for these principles of justice.

In essence, the veil of ignorance forces impartiality and ensures that the principles of justice we agree upon are not biased by our personal circumstances, making them defensible on purely rational grounds.