As I continued to analyze Rawls’ s ideas, I came to the realization that personal responsibility is hard to understand fully. It’ s important to question if we are truly responsible for certain outcomes since there are specific circumstances that shape us beyond our control( race, economic status, etc.). Rawls’ theory holds that a fair society would require all constraints to be neutralized, so that everyone has equal opportunities. This idea, however, isn’ t accurate in today’ s world where inequality is roaming. I started to question how we can define moral responsibility if responsibility is molded by circumstances. For Rawls, the ideal society would focus on closing the gap between the privileged and unprivileged, but in reality, those who are powerful have an easier time controlling their outcomes compared to those confined by their circumstances. This is why it’ s important to consider whether justice can truly exist, given the fact that people are born into situations where the control of their opportunities is limited.
This pushed me to think about the duty we have toward each other, which should include a special consideration for those with scarce resources or complex circumstances. Rawls highlights the importance of strong institutions that protect the most vulnerable and promote true justice. On the ship Travesía, as the journey continued, I formed a conclusion: Rawls’ concept of moral duty is hard to apply due to the injustices of the world. While speaking about offering a helping hand is easy, truly helping isn’ t. Our personal needs and interests create a path of selfishness that’ s hard to push aside, especially when trying to prioritize fairness. Travesía proved this realization of mine: despite our same final destination, the passengers who could afford advantages would be more comfortable than those who couldn’ t. The duty to help the less fortunate is crucial, but it battles with our selfishness.
Travesía • revista estudiantil | 23