Key Arguments

• Rawls identifies three distinct judgment‑tasks for a citizen: first, 'he must judge the justice of legislation and social policies'; second, 'a citizen must decide which constitutional arrangements are just for reconciling conflicting opinions of justice'; and third, he 'must ascertain when the enactments of the majority are to be complied with and when they can be rejected as no longer binding.'
• He argues that 'a complete conception of justice is not only able to assess laws and policies but it can also rank procedures for selecting which political opinion is to be enacted into law,' showing that the principles must evaluate both outcomes and procedures.
• Since the political process 'is at best one of imperfect procedural justice,' citizens need guidance about 'the grounds and limits of political duty and obligation,' so the theory must cover not only ideal procedures but also compliance questions.
• From this he infers: 'Thus a theory of justice has to deal with at least three types of questions, and this indicates that it may be useful to think of the principles as applied in a several-stage sequence.' The multi‑stage idea is explicitly presented as a way to structure these different questions.
• He introduces this as 'an elaboration of the original position,' suggesting that the same contractual framework can generate a sequence of normative standpoints corresponding to these different judgment‑tasks.

Source Quotes

It is evident that some sort of framework is needed to simplify the application of the two principles of justice. For consider three kinds of judgments that a citizen has to make. First of all, he must judge the justice of legislation and social policies.

For consider three kinds of judgments that a citizen has to make. First of all, he must judge the justice of legislation and social policies. But he also knows that his opinions will not always coincide with those of others, since men’s judgments and beliefs are likely to differ especially when their interests are engaged.

But he also knows that his opinions will not always coincide with those of others, since men’s judgments and beliefs are likely to differ especially when their interests are engaged. Therefore secondly, a citizen must decide which constitutional arrangements are just for reconciling conflicting opinions of justice. We may think of the political process as a machine which makes social decisions when the views of representatives and their constituents are fed into it.

The citizen accepts a certain constitution as just, and he thinks that certain traditional procedures are appropriate, for example, the procedure of majority rule duly circumscribed. Yet since the political process is at best one of imperfect procedural justice, he must ascertain when the enactments of the majority are to be complied with and when they can be rejected as no longer binding. In short, he must be able to determine the grounds and limits of political duty and obligation.

In short, he must be able to determine the grounds and limits of political duty and obligation. Thus a theory of justice has to deal with at least three types of questions, and this indicates that it may be useful to think of the principles as applied in a several-stage sequence. At this point, then, I introduce an elaboration of the original position.

Key Concepts

• For consider three kinds of judgments that a citizen has to make.
• First of all, he must judge the justice of legislation and social policies.
• a citizen must decide which constitutional arrangements are just for reconciling conflicting opinions of justice.
• he must ascertain when the enactments of the majority are to be complied with and when they can be rejected as no longer binding.
• Thus a theory of justice has to deal with at least three types of questions, and this indicates that it may be useful to think of the principles as applied in a several-stage sequence.

Context

Opening paragraphs of §31, where Rawls explains why a mere statement of two principles is insufficient and introduces the need for a structured sequence of application points to handle law, constitution, and political obligation.