Rawl’s theory of justice can be related to the Kantian tradition. According to Rawl’s critics on the establishment of the justice principles, it is impossible to refer to the position of Rawl as Kantian. Both Rawl and Kantian theory provide a basis for establishing just conduct. Therefore, Rawl’s can be translated as a means of translating the Nicomachean Ethics and moral reasoning formulated by Aristotle and Kant respectively. This offers an explanation as to why an individual who judges what is morally right cannot act immorally in a given situation. Thus, proving the link between Aristotle and Rawl’s Kantianism, concerning the just conduct motivation; it assists in understanding the Kant’s perspective on morals. This can be realized using the words of Rawl such as mutual respect, morality, and self-esteem.

Rawls’ view considered ‘contractarianism’ because it argues that principles of a given group can guide a person’s act. The group is composed of people who decide on the regional position because they are ignorant. Additionally, the theory decides upon the society’s basic structure. This makes it unfit for formulating ethical principles.

In the Rawls theory, children are excluded from the libertarian framework. According to the author, individuals in the original positions are family heads. Therefore, he says little about children concerning justice requirements. In the Rawls theory, it is also challenging to include children and make the part of a contract. It is argued that there is no association between rationality and children. It seems that Rawls is basing his argument on the fact that children are irrational, and this is also extended to other non-human animals. This is because it is believed that only human beings are rational.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?