ISC Class 11 · Chapter 8

Justice: Meaning, and the Theories of John Rawls and Amartya Sen, ISC Class 11

Updated 15 October 2026 · Fact-checked

Justice means giving each person what is due to them, fairly. John Rawls's theory of 'justice as fairness' asks people to choose principles behind a veil of ignorance: equal basic liberties for all, and inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged. Amartya Sen asks instead how to reduce real injustices, judging people's actual capabilities through public reasoning.

What Justice is about

The syllabus asks for the meaning of justice and the features of two contemporary theories.

1. Meaning: from the Latin 'jus' (right, bond). Classical ideas: Plato (each class doing its own proper function), Aristotle (distributive and corrective justice), and the Roman lawyers' 'constant and perpetual will to give everyone his due'. Dimensions: legal, social, economic and political justice; the Preamble to the Constitution of India promises 'JUSTICE, social, economic and political'.

2. John Rawls (A Theory of Justice, 1971): justice as fairness; the original position and the veil of ignorance; two principles (equal basic liberties; fair equality of opportunity and the difference principle); priority of liberty.

3. Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice, 2009): a comparative, realisation-focused approach; niti and nyaya; capabilities rather than resources; public reasoning and democracy; impartiality open to outside views; plural reasons (the flute example).

The syllabus says 'features only', so learn each theory as five or six clear features, and be ready to contrast them.

Weightage: CISCE gives no Class XI unit weightage for ISC Political Science. Justice is topic 8 of the Class XI syllabus (Political Theory) and can be asked anywhere in the 80-mark Paper I (Theory, 3 hours). Class XI is examined by the school, so your school sets the paper and decides how many marks each topic carries.Source: CISCE ISC Political Science (852) syllabus, examination year 2028, Class XI

Key concepts

Meaning and dimensions of justice

The word comes from the Latin 'jus', meaning right or bond; justice binds people together in a fair social order.

Classical views

Plato (The Republic): justice is each person and class performing the function for which they are best suited, without interfering with others.
Aristotle: distributive justice (distributing honours and goods in proportion to merit) and corrective justice (setting right wrongs between individuals, as courts do).
Roman law (Justinian's Institutes): justice is the constant and perpetual will to give everyone his due.

Three common principles
1. Equal treatment of equals.
2. Proportionate rewards for effort and skill.
3. Special consideration for special needs.

Dimensions

Legal justice: just laws applied fairly by independent courts; rule of law.
Social justice: removal of discrimination and privilege based on caste, sex or religion; dignity for all.
Economic justice: fair distribution of wealth and opportunities; basic needs met.
Political justice: equal political rights and participation.

The Preamble to the Constitution of India promises justice: social, economic and political.

Worked example

[4] Explain the meaning of justice and its dimensions. (Understanding)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

From 'jus'; giving each person their due (Roman law) - 1 mark.
Classical views: Plato (own function), Aristotle (distributive and corrective) - 1 mark.
Dimensions: legal, social, economic, political - 1 mark.
Preamble: justice, social, economic and political - 1 mark.

Answer: Justice, from the Latin 'jus', means giving each person their due in a fair social order. Plato saw it as each person doing his proper function, and Aristotle divided it into distributive and corrective justice. It has legal, social, economic and political dimensions, and the Preamble to the Constitution of India promises justice, social, economic and political.

Rawls: the original position and the veil of ignorance

John Rawls (1921-2002), an American philosopher, set out his theory in A Theory of Justice (1971).

Features
1. Justice as fairness: justice is the first virtue of social institutions; principles of justice are those that free and rational people would agree to under fair conditions.
2. Social contract approach: Rawls revived the idea of a contract, but as a thought experiment, not a historical event.
3. Original position: imagine people meeting to choose the principles that will govern their society.
4. Veil of ignorance: in the original position people do not know their own place in society: their class, caste, sex, wealth, talents, religion or views of the good life. They know only general facts about society.
5. Why the veil matters: since no one knows whether they will be rich or poor, strong or weak, they cannot choose principles that favour themselves; they will choose principles that are fair to everyone and protect the worst-off position, in case it is theirs.
6. Primary goods: people would want basic goods everyone needs, such as rights and liberties, opportunities, income and wealth, and the social bases of self-respect.

Worked example

[4] Explain Rawls's ideas of the original position and the veil of ignorance. (Understanding)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Original position: a hypothetical meeting to choose principles of justice - 1 mark.
Veil of ignorance: people do not know their class, sex, talents, wealth, religion - 1 mark.
So they cannot choose principles favouring themselves - 1 mark.
They choose fair principles that protect the worst-off position - 1 mark.

Answer: Rawls asks us to imagine an original position in which people choose the principles that will govern their society. Behind a veil of ignorance they do not know their own class, sex, talents, wealth or religion, so they cannot rig the rules in their own favour. Fearing that they might end up among the worst-off, they would choose fair principles that protect everyone, especially the least advantaged.

Rawls's two principles of justice

Rawls argued that people in the original position would choose two principles.

First principle (equal liberty): each person has an equal right to the most extensive scheme of basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme for all, such as freedom of speech, conscience, the vote, holding office and protection from arbitrary arrest.

Second principle: social and economic inequalities are acceptable only if:
(a) they are attached to offices and positions open to all under fair equality of opportunity (not just formal openness, but real chances through education and support); and
(b) they are to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society (the difference principle).

Priority rules

The first principle comes first: basic liberties cannot be sacrificed for economic gains.
Within the second principle, fair equality of opportunity comes before the difference principle.

Implications

Rawls's theory supports a liberal democracy with a welfare state: rights for all, plus redistribution that improves the position of the poorest.
Inequality is not unjust in itself; unequal rewards for doctors or engineers are fair if they lead to benefits that also help the least advantaged.
Example in India: reservations and scholarships can be defended as fair equality of opportunity for disadvantaged groups.

Worked example

[4] State Rawls's two principles of justice. (Recall)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

First: equal basic liberties for all - 1 mark.
Second (a): positions open to all under fair equality of opportunity - 1 mark.
Second (b): difference principle: inequalities must benefit the least advantaged - 1 mark.
Priority of liberty over economic gain - 1 mark.

Answer: Rawls's first principle gives every person an equal right to the most extensive basic liberties compatible with the same liberties for all. His second principle allows social and economic inequalities only if positions are open to all under fair equality of opportunity and if the inequalities work to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged (the difference principle). The first principle has priority, so liberty cannot be traded for economic gains.

Amartya Sen: comparative and realisation-focused justice

Amartya Sen (born 1933), the Indian economist and philosopher who received the Nobel Prize in Economics (1998), set out his theory in The Idea of Justice (2009).

Features
1. Comparative, not ideal: Sen criticises theories like Rawls's, which try to identify perfectly just institutions ('transcendental institutionalism'). We do not need to know what a perfectly just society looks like to recognise and remove clear injustices, such as famine, slavery or the subjection of women.
2. Realisation-focused: what matters is the actual lives people are able to live, not only the rules and institutions on paper.
3. Niti and nyaya: Sen uses two Sanskrit words. Niti refers to organisational propriety and correct rules; nyaya refers to the realised justice of the world that actually emerges. A just society must care about nyaya, avoiding matsyanyaya, 'justice in the world of fish', where a big fish freely devours a small one.
4. The focus is on removing manifest, remediable injustice step by step.

Worked example

[4] Explain Sen's distinction between niti and nyaya and its importance for his idea of justice. (Understanding)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Niti: correct rules and institutions - 1 mark.
Nyaya: realised justice in people's actual lives - 1 mark.
Matsyanyaya: the big fish devouring the small; must be avoided - 1 mark.
So justice must be judged by outcomes, not only by institutions - 1 mark.

Answer: Sen uses niti for correct rules and institutional propriety, and nyaya for the justice actually realised in people's lives. Even with good rules, a society can fall into matsyanyaya, the 'justice of fish' in which the big fish devour the small. So justice must be judged by how people actually live, not only by whether the right institutions exist.

Sen: capabilities, public reasoning and plural reasons

5. Capability approach: Sen argues that justice should be judged by people's capabilities: their real freedom to do and be what they have reason to value (to be nourished, healthy, educated, to take part in community life). Resources or Rawls's primary goods are not enough, because people differ in their ability to convert resources into a good life (a disabled person may need more resources to move about).
6. Public reasoning and democracy: justice is worked out through open public discussion; Sen describes democracy as 'government by discussion'. A free press and democratic debate help prevent famines and expose injustice.
7. Open impartiality: drawing on Adam Smith's 'impartial spectator', Sen says we should listen to views from outside our own society, not only to those inside a closed contract.
8. Plurality of reasons: there may be several reasonable, conflicting principles. In his example of three children and a flute, Anne claims it because she alone can play it, Bob because he is so poor he has no toys, and Carla because she made it. Each claim has a strong reason (fulfilment, equality, reward for labour); there may be no single right answer, so we must reason comparatively.

Worked example

[4] Explain the capability approach and Sen's 'flute' example. (Understanding)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Capability: real freedom to do and be what one values - 1 mark.
Resources alone are not enough; people convert them differently - 1 mark.
Flute: Anne can play it, Bob is poorest, Carla made it - 1 mark.
Shows plural reasonable principles; need for comparative public reasoning - 1 mark.

Answer: Sen's capability approach judges justice by people's real freedom to do and be what they value, such as being healthy and educated, because people differ in their ability to turn resources into a good life. In his flute example, Anne claims the flute because only she can play it, Bob because he is the poorest, and Carla because she made it; each has a good reason, showing that there are plural reasonable principles and that justice must be found through comparative public reasoning.

Justice in real life

Each concept, met in an everyday situation. Read the situation, answer the question in your own words, then compare with the model answer. The one-line hook is what to remember.

Veil of ignorance

Suppose a class must decide how hostel rooms will be allotted, but no student knows in advance whether they will be in the first or the last batch to choose.

What rule would students probably choose, and which theory does this illustrate?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Not knowing their own position, students cannot favour themselves.
They would choose a rule fair even to the last batch (e.g., all rooms of similar standard).
This illustrates Rawls's veil of ignorance.

Answer: They would choose a rule fair to everyone, especially the worst-placed, because any of them might be last; this is Rawls's veil of ignorance leading to fair principles.

Memory hook: If you might get the last slice, you cut fairly.

Capabilities versus resources

Imagine a school gives every student the same bicycle allowance, but one student uses a wheelchair and cannot ride a bicycle.

Is equal money fair here? Which theory helps answer?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Equal resources do not give equal ability to travel.
The student needs different support to achieve the same freedom.
Sen's capability approach focuses on what people can actually do.

Answer: Not fully; equal money does not give her equal mobility. Sen's capability approach says justice should look at the real freedom to get around, so she needs support suited to her situation.

Memory hook: Same money, different freedoms.

Removing manifest injustice

Suppose a town council argues for years about the perfect design for a fair water system while some neighbourhoods still have no water at all.

What would Sen advise?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Waiting for a perfect plan delays action.
The lack of water is a clear, remediable injustice.
Sen's comparative approach says remove it now.

Answer: Sen would say: do not wait for a perfectly just design; act at once to remove the obvious injustice of neighbourhoods without water, improving justice step by step.

Memory hook: Fix the clear wrong before drawing the perfect plan.

Topics in this chapter

Justice: key facts

Meaning: Justice = giving each their due ('jus'); Plato, Aristotle, Roman law.
Dimensions: Legal, social, economic, political; Preamble: justice, social, economic and political.
Rawls: A Theory of Justice, 1971: justice as fairness; Original position; veil of ignorance.
Rawls's principles: 1. Equal basic liberties; 2(a) fair equality of opportunity; 2(b) difference principle; Liberty has priority.
Sen: The Idea of Justice, 2009; Nobel Prize 1998; Comparative, realisation-focused.
Sen's ideas: Niti and nyaya; capabilities; public reasoning; open impartiality; plural reasons (flute); Avoid matsyanyaya.

How the school exam asks Justice

The question patterns to expect, and the method that works for each.

Question type	How it is asked	Method
Meaning	Define justice; explain its dimensions.	Definition, one classical view, four dimensions, Preamble.
Four-mark features	Features of Rawls's theory; Sen's idea of justice; veil of ignorance; capability approach.	Features only, four distinct points.
Eight-mark comparison	Compare Rawls and Sen.	Ideal versus comparative; institutions versus lives; primary goods versus capabilities; contract versus public reasoning.

Tricks to remember Justice

Short memory aids. Say each one aloud once, then use it on a question the same day.

Rawls: 'O-V-L-D'
Original position, Veil of ignorance, Liberty first, Difference principle.
Use it when: Four features of Rawls.
Sen: 'C-R-N-C-P'
Comparative, Realisation (nyaya), Niti and nyaya, Capabilities, Public reasoning.
Use it when: Features of Sen.
Flute trio
Anne plays, Bob is poor, Carla made it.
Use it when: Plural reasons example.

Justice: exam-level solved questions

Ordered from exam level to HOTS. Cover the solution, write your own, then compare step by step.

Example 1: Veil of ignorance · 1 mark · MCQExam level

The concept of the 'veil of ignorance' was given by:
(a) Amartya Sen
(b) John Rawls
(c) Plato
(d) J. S. Mill

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Sen criticised Rawls's ideal approach.
Rawls used the veil of ignorance in A Theory of Justice (1971).

Answer: (b) John Rawls.

Example 2: Assertion-reason: Sen and Rawls · 1 mark · Assertion-reasonHarder exam level

Assertion (A): Amartya Sen argues that we do not need a theory of a perfectly just society to remove injustice.
Reason (R): Sen holds that justice should be judged by comparing actual situations and the lives people can lead.
(a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.
(b) Both A and R are true but R is not the correct explanation of A.
(c) A is true but R is false.
(d) A is false but R is true.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

A is Sen's criticism of transcendental institutionalism.
R gives his comparative, realisation-focused reason, so it explains A.

Answer: (a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.

Example 3: Difference principle in practice · 4 marks · Short answerHarder exam level

[4] Explain Rawls's difference principle with an example. (Analysis)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Inequalities are allowed only if they benefit the least advantaged most.
Example: higher pay for doctors is just if it leads to better health care for the poor.
Example: progressive taxation funding services for the poorest.
It rejects inequalities that benefit only the better off.

Answer: The difference principle allows social and economic inequalities only if they bring the greatest benefit to the least advantaged. Higher pay for doctors, for example, is just if it attracts talent that improves health care for the poor, and taxing higher incomes to fund services for the poorest fits the principle; inequalities that only make the rich richer are unjust.

Example 4: Rawls and Indian reservations · 4 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency

[4] Can Rawls's theory justify reservations in India? Discuss. (Evaluate)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Fair equality of opportunity needs real, not just formal, chances.
Historically disadvantaged groups lack real chances; reservations improve them.
Difference principle favours the least advantaged.
But Rawls's principle concerns individuals' positions; critics ask whether benefits reach the worst-off within groups.

Answer: Largely yes. Rawls's fair equality of opportunity requires real, not merely formal, chances, and groups that suffered historic exclusion lack them, so reservations can be seen as securing fairness; the difference principle also favours the least advantaged. But critics note that Rawls speaks of individuals' positions, and ask whether reservations always reach the worst-off within those groups.

Example 5: Rawls versus Sen · 8 marks · Long answerHOTS / competency

[8] Compare the theories of justice of John Rawls and Amartya Sen. (Analysis)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Rawls: ideal (transcendental) theory of just institutions (1).
Sen: comparative approach to removing injustice (1).
Rawls: focus on institutions and rules (1).
Sen: realisation; niti and nyaya (1).
Rawls: primary goods (1).
Sen: capabilities (1).
Rawls: contract behind a veil of ignorance (1).
Sen: public reasoning, open impartiality, plural reasons (1).

Answer: Rawls offers an ideal theory that identifies the principles of a perfectly just society, whereas Sen argues for a comparative approach that removes manifest injustices step by step. Rawls focuses on just institutions and rules; Sen on the lives people actually lead, contrasting niti (rules) with nyaya (realised justice). Rawls measures advantage in primary goods such as rights, income and opportunities; Sen in capabilities, the real freedom to do and be what people value. Rawls derives his principles from a hypothetical contract behind a veil of ignorance; Sen relies on open public reasoning, impartiality that listens to outside views, and recognition that several reasonable principles may conflict, as in his flute example.

Example 6: Sen and democracy · 4 marks · Short answerHarder exam level

[4] Why does Sen give importance to public reasoning and democracy in his idea of justice? (Analysis)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Justice is not fixed by one theorist; it is worked out through open discussion.
Democracy as 'government by discussion'.
A free press and debate expose injustice (e.g., help prevent famines).
Plural reasons need reasoned public scrutiny to reach agreement.

Answer: For Sen justice is not handed down by a single theory but worked out through open public discussion; he calls democracy 'government by discussion'. A free press and debate expose injustices and push governments to act, which is why he links democracy with the prevention of famines, and since several reasonable principles may conflict, public scrutiny is needed to reach workable agreement.

Case-study practice (Section D style)

Read the situation, then answer every part. In a school exam set on the board pattern this is a 8-mark question split into 1 + 3 + 2 + 2 marks.

Allotting a scholarship (source-based)

Read the imaginary situation and answer.

A college has one scholarship. Three students apply. Meera has the highest marks and will make best use of the course. Arjun comes from the poorest family and cannot study without help. Salma has worked for two years as a volunteer teacher in the college's evening school. The committee cannot agree.

(i) · 1 mark
Which example of Amartya Sen does this situation resemble?
Answer
Answer: The example of three children and a flute.
1 mark.
(ii) · 3 marks
Name the principle behind each student's claim.
Answer
Answer: Meera: best use or fulfilment of ability; Arjun: equality or need; Salma: reward for effort and labour.
1 mark each.
(iii) · 2 marks
What lesson does Sen draw from such cases?
Answer
Answer: There may be several reasonable, conflicting principles of justice, so we should reason comparatively and publicly instead of looking for one perfect rule.
1 for plural reasons; 1 for comparative public reasoning.
(iv) · 2 marks
How might Rawls's difference principle decide the case?
Answer
Answer: It would favour Arjun, as the least advantaged, since inequalities in benefit should work to the greatest advantage of the worst-off.
1 for Arjun; 1 for the reason.

Where the marks are

How a typical answer is split into step marks. Show every step: a right final answer alone rarely earns full marks.

[4] Features of Sen's idea of justice. (4 marks)

Step	Marks
Comparative, not ideal.	1
Niti and nyaya; realisation.	1
Capabilities.	1
Public reasoning; plural reasons.	1

[8] Rawls and Sen compared. (8 marks)

Step	Marks
Ideal versus comparative.	1
Explanation of each.	1
Institutions versus realisations.	1
Niti and nyaya.	1
Primary goods versus capabilities.	1
Example of difference.	1
Contract versus public reasoning.	1
Conclusion.	1

Where students lose marks in Justice

The slips examiners see most often, and what to write instead.

Mistake: Long criticism when only features are asked
The syllabus says features only.
Do this: List features; criticise only if asked to evaluate.
Usually costs: Time and marks.
Mistake: Stating the difference principle as equal distribution
Rawls allows inequality that helps the worst-off.
Wrong working
Rawls wants all incomes equal.
Right working
Inequalities are allowed if they benefit the least advantaged most.
Do this: Use the phrase 'greatest benefit of the least advantaged'.
Usually costs: 1-2 marks.
Mistake: Confusing niti and nyaya
Unfamiliar Sanskrit terms.
Do this: Niti = rules/institutions; nyaya = realised justice.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Forgetting the priority of liberty
Students list two principles without ranking.
Do this: First principle comes first: liberty cannot be traded for gain.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Wrong names in the flute example
Mixing up claims.
Do this: Anne plays, Bob poor, Carla made it.
Usually costs: 1 mark.

Practice questions on Justice

Write each answer on paper first. Open the hint only if you are stuck, and the answer only when you have finished.

Q1 · 1 mark · Very short answerExam level
From which Latin word is 'justice' derived?
Hint
Right or bond.
Answer
Jus.
Q2 · 1 mark · Very short answerExam level
Name the book in which Rawls set out justice as fairness.
Hint
1971.
Answer
A Theory of Justice.
Q3 · 1 mark · MCQExam level
Sen's idea of justice judges well-being by:
(a) Income alone
(b) Primary goods
(c) Capabilities
(d) Utility only
Hint
Real freedom to do and be.
Answer
(c) Capabilities.
Q4 · 1 mark · Very short answerHarder exam level
What is matsyanyaya?
Hint
Fish.
Answer
'Justice in the world of fish', where big fish freely devour small fish; a state of injustice to be avoided.
Q5 · 4 marks · Short answerHarder exam level
[4] Explain Aristotle's distributive and corrective justice.
Hint
Distribution and rectification.
Answer
(1) Distributive justice concerns the distribution of honours, wealth and goods among members of society. (2) It follows proportion: rewards according to merit or contribution. (3) Corrective justice concerns setting right wrongs between individuals in transactions. (4) It restores balance through courts, for example by compensation or punishment.
Q6 · 4 marks · Short answerHarder exam level
[4] Why would people behind the veil of ignorance choose Rawls's principles?
Hint
Risk, worst-off position.
Answer
(1) They do not know their place in society. (2) They might turn out to be the poorest or most disadvantaged. (3) So they would secure equal basic liberties for all and protect the worst-off position. (4) Rational, self-interested choice under uncertainty therefore produces fair principles.
Q7 · 4 marks · Short answerHarder exam level
[4] Explain why Sen calls Rawls's approach 'transcendental institutionalism'.
Hint
Perfect society, institutions.
Answer
(1) 'Transcendental' means seeking the perfectly just society. (2) 'Institutionalism' means concentrating on just institutions and rules. (3) Sen argues this is neither necessary nor sufficient for removing real injustices. (4) He prefers comparing actual situations and the lives people lead.
Q8 · 4 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency
[4] Give one strength and one weakness each of Rawls's and Sen's theories.
Hint
Four points.
Answer
(1) Rawls's strength: a clear, fair procedure (veil of ignorance) that protects liberty and the least advantaged. (2) Rawls's weakness: the original position is hypothetical, and focusing on institutions may ignore actual outcomes. (3) Sen's strength: attention to people's real capabilities and to removing manifest injustice. (4) Sen's weakness: without a complete theory, it can be hard to settle conflicts among plural reasons.
Q9 · 4 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency
[4] How is the ideal of social, economic and political justice reflected in the Constitution of India?
Hint
Preamble, rights, DPSP.
Answer
(1) The Preamble promises justice, social, economic and political. (2) Social: Articles 15 and 17 against discrimination and untouchability. (3) Economic: Directive Principles such as Article 39 on livelihood and equal pay. (4) Political: adult suffrage (Article 326) and equal opportunity in public employment (Article 16).
Q10 · 8 marks · Long answerHarder exam level
[8] (a) Explain the meaning and dimensions of justice. [4]
(b) State the features of Rawls's theory of justice. [4]
Hint
(a) meaning, classics, dimensions; (b) O-V-L-D.
Answer
(a) (1) 'Jus'; giving each their due. (2) Plato and Aristotle. (3) Legal, social, economic, political dimensions. (4) Preamble's promise. (b) (1) Justice as fairness; original position. (2) Veil of ignorance. (3) First principle: equal basic liberties with priority. (4) Second principle: fair equality of opportunity and the difference principle.

Test your recall

Answer in your head or on paper first, then open the card. Pulling an answer out of memory makes it stick far better than re-reading.

1.What did Plato mean by justice?Show answer
Each person and class performing its own proper function.
2.What does the veil of ignorance hide?Show answer
People's own class, sex, wealth, talents, religion and views of the good life.
3.What are Rawls's primary goods?Show answer
Rights and liberties, opportunities, income and wealth, and the social bases of self-respect.
4.In which year did Sen win the Nobel Prize in Economics?Show answer
1998.
5.When was The Idea of Justice published?Show answer
2009.
6.What does Sen mean by capabilities?Show answer
People's real freedom to do and be what they have reason to value.

Best order to study it

Meaning; classical views; dimensions; Preamble.
Rawls: original position, veil of ignorance.
Rawls: two principles and priority.
Sen: comparative approach, niti and nyaya.
Sen: capabilities, public reasoning, flute example.
Comparison.

Quick revision checklist

The night before the exam: can you do each of these without looking?

Justice: 'jus'; giving each their due; Plato, Aristotle; legal, social, economic, political.
Rawls (1971): justice as fairness; original position; veil of ignorance; primary goods.
Rawls's principles: equal basic liberties (priority); fair equality of opportunity; difference principle.
Sen (2009): comparative, realisation-focused; niti and nyaya; matsyanyaya.
Sen: capabilities; public reasoning (government by discussion); open impartiality; plural reasons (flute).

Justice: frequently asked questions

Do I need to know utilitarian theories of justice?

No. The syllabus names only the meaning of justice and the theories of Rawls and Sen (features only).

Is Sen against Rawls?

Sen admired Rawls and dedicated The Idea of Justice to his memory, but he disagreed with his ideal, institution-centred approach and proposed a comparative, realisation-focused alternative.

Does Rawls's theory apply to India?

His ideas of fair equality of opportunity and help for the least advantaged are often used to discuss Indian policies such as reservations and welfare schemes, though Rawls wrote mainly about liberal democracies in general.

Based on: CISCE ISC 2028 Political Science (852) syllabus (Classes XI and XII); CISCE Regulations for the ISC Examination Year 2028 (Class XI internal examination)