Political and Social Philosophy: Authority, Justice, Liberty
What this domain asks
This domain examines the justification of political authority and the design of just institutions. Candidates should know social contract theory (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau), liberty and its limits (Mill's harm principle), justice (Rawls' veil of ignorance and difference principle; Nozick's entitlement theory), equality, rights, and the relation between state and individual.
Concepts to hold firmly
- Social contract: legitimacy derives from consent, actual or hypothetical.
- State of nature: Hobbes (war of all against all), Locke (natural rights, property), Rousseau (natural freedom corrupted by society).
- Mill: liberty may be restricted only to prevent harm to others.
- Rawls: principles chosen behind a veil of ignorance; the difference principle permits inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged.
- Nozick: justice in acquisition, transfer, and rectification; patterned redistribution violates entitlement.
Traps
- Treating Hobbes as a defender of limited government; his sovereign is powerful by design.
- Confusing Rawls' veil of ignorance with a claim about actual ignorance.
- Reading Mill's harm principle as licensing any restriction that reduces offense.
- Equating equality of outcome with equality of opportunity.
Rule of thumb
Ask whether the question concerns the origin of authority (contract, consent), the scope of liberty (harm principle), or the distribution of goods (justice theories). Each has its own vocabulary and typical distractors.
Worked example
"A policy benefits the wealthy but also raises the position of the poorest. Which view could endorse it?" Rawls' difference principle, since inequalities are permitted when they improve the least advantaged position.