Political and Social Philosophy: Justice, Rights, Liberty and Authority
What you must understand
Examine justice through Rawls's veil of ignorance and the two principles (equal basic liberties; the difference principle permitting inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged). Contrast this with Nozick's entitlement theory (acquisition, transfer, rectification) and his critique of patterned redistribution. Consider utilitarianism, egalitarianism and communitarian critiques (Sandel, MacIntyre).
On liberty, understand negative liberty (freedom from interference) and positive liberty (freedom to realise one's potential), and Isaiah Berlin's warning that positive liberty can license coercion. Mill's harm principle limits interference to preventing harm to others.
On authority, study the social contract tradition (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) and philosophical anarchism, which denies a general duty to obey. Evaluate legitimacy, consent and civil disobedience (Thoreau, Rawls).
On rights, distinguish natural from legal, positive from negative, and consider whether group rights are coherent.
Traps
Students often equate justice with equality-Rawls permits inequality under conditions. Don't conflate negative liberty with libertarianism. Watch for questions assuming that consent alone establishes legitimacy; tacit consent is contested. Avoid treating Mill's harm principle as absolute.
Worked example and rule of thumb
On redistributive taxation: a Nozickean argues it violates entitlement and self-ownership; a Rawlsian replies that the difference principle would be chosen behind the veil. Present both, then assess which better satisfies fairness.
Rule of thumb: ask what conception of the person and society each theory presupposes-autonomous choosers, rational contractors, or socially embedded agents.