This Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that autonomy, or the ability to self-govern oneself, is the basis for morality and justice. Two contemporary philosophers, John Rawls and Robert Nozick, develop Kantian notions of autonomy to argue for different views of socio-economic justice (i.e. the distribution of wealth and goods for justice). In your paper, explain how Rawls and Nozick develop two different notions of socio-economic justice from Kantian autonomy and why they are at odds with one another. Examine the pros and cons of each side and determine which position (Rawlsian or Nozickian) is most just. Finally, at the end of your paper, explain whether John Stuart Mill and/or Peter Singer (utilitarian philosophy) would support the socio-economic system that you argued was best and why.
Your paper should be 4-5 pages double-spaced, normal margins. Do not copy from the internet and external sources. You do not need to use external sources.
Focus the paper to me believing in JOhn RAwls theory after you cite the pros and cons. Then focus on me supporting John Stuart Mill's philosophy to support a Rawls system.
Sample Solution