Rawls and Friedan | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: 6 days ago
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time:Â 45 to 55 minutes
Rawls and Friedan are the final two specified liberal thinkers in Edexcel A-Level Politics. This Rawls and Friedan A-Level Politics revision page explains Rawls's theory of justice and veil of ignorance, alongside Friedan's arguments for legal equality and equal opportunity. Both thinkers are particularly useful for understanding the modern liberal concern with whether individuals have a genuine opportunity to flourish. Their ideas develop the debates about equality introduced in liberal rationalism and equality and the distinction between classical and modern liberalism.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain John Rawls's theory of justice.
Explain Rawls's veil of ignorance and its purpose as a hypothetical scenario.
Explain Betty Friedan's idea of legal equality.
Explain Friedan's argument for equal opportunity.
Relate Rawls and Friedan to modern liberalism, developmental individualism and positive freedom.
Analyse how their ideas contribute to liberal debates about equality and social justice.
Revision Notes đź“š
Rawls and Friedan A-Level Politics revision
Edexcel specifies five liberal thinkers whose ideas should be used to exemplify the core principles and divisions within liberalism.
This lesson focuses on:
John Rawls
Betty Friedan
Edexcel specifies exactly two ideas for each:
Thinker | Specified ideas |
John Rawls | Theory of justice; veil of ignorance |
Betty Friedan | Legal equality; equal opportunity |
The specification explicitly states that students should focus on these listed ideas rather than detailed biographical information about the thinkers.
This means you do not need detailed accounts of their lives or additional theories outside the specification. In an examination, Rawls and Friedan should be used to support arguments about liberalism.
John Rawls
Edexcel requires knowledge of two Rawlsian ideas:
Theory of justice
The veil of ignorance
These ideas are particularly useful when examining modern liberal approaches to equality, social justice and the role of the state.
Rawls's theory of justice
Edexcel defines Rawls's theory of justice as the opinion that:
society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living.
The central idea is therefore that a liberal society should not be judged only by whether individuals are formally free from interference.
It must also be just.
Rawls's focus on justice connects directly to the wider liberal principle of equality and social justice, which Edexcel defines as the belief that individuals are of equal value and should be treated impartially and fairly by society.
Justice and the individual
Rawls remains a liberal thinker because his concern with justice is focused on the position of the individual.
His specified theory does not abandon liberal individualism. Instead, society must be organised in a way that guarantees each citizen a life worth living.
The emphasis remains on individual people.
This allows Rawls to be connected with the wider liberal principle:
Individuals possess equal value
↓
society should treat them fairly
↓
society must therefore be just
↓
each citizen should be guaranteed a life worth living
This is one reason Rawls is particularly useful when discussing modern liberalism.
Rawls and modern liberalism
Modern liberalism emerged in reaction to free-market capitalism because modern liberals believed that simply leaving individuals alone had not made everyone genuinely free. Freedom could therefore no longer be defined only as non-interference.
Rawls's theory of justice fits this modern liberal concern.
The connection is:
Modern liberalism
↓
freedom cannot always mean simply being left alone
↓
individuals should have the conditions needed for meaningful freedom
↓
society must be just
↓
each citizen should have a life worth living
This links Rawls to ideas already studied in classical and modern liberalism.
Rawls and developmental individualism
Modern liberalism is associated with developmental individualism.
Edexcel defines developmental individualism as the idea that individual freedom is linked to human flourishing.
Rawls's theory of justice can therefore be connected to developmental individualism.
If society must guarantee each citizen a life worth living, the concern is not merely whether individuals have been left alone. It is also whether the conditions of society allow individuals to live meaningful lives.
The connection can be remembered as:
Developmental individualism= freedom linked to human flourishing
Rawls's theory of justice= a just society should guarantee each citizen a life worth living
Both therefore fit a modern liberal concern with what individuals are actually able to achieve.
Rawls and positive freedom
Rawls can also be connected to positive freedom.
Edexcel defines positive freedom as freedom involving personal fulfilment and the realisation of potential.
Classical liberalism places stronger emphasis on negative freedom, meaning freedom from external constraints.
Modern liberals argue that negative freedom alone may not be enough.
Rawls's theory of justice helps illustrate this distinction because his focus is not simply on removing state interference. It is on whether society itself is sufficiently just to guarantee citizens lives worth living.
Rawls and the enabling state
Modern liberalism is associated with an enabling state, a larger state that helps individuals achieve their potential and be free.
Past Edexcel mark schemes explicitly use Rawls to illustrate the modern liberal view that the state can be viewed less as a threat to individual liberty and more as something capable of guaranteeing or enabling it.
The distinction is important:
Classical liberal concern: Could state intervention reduce individual freedom?
Modern liberal concern: Could insufficient state action leave individuals unable to become genuinely free?
Rawls can therefore be used in debates about why modern liberals accept a larger role for the state than classical liberals.
⚠️ Rawls does not mean modern liberals support unlimited government. Modern liberalism remains liberal and therefore retains concerns about individual liberty and limits on political power.
Rawls's veil of ignorance
Rawls's second specified idea is the veil of ignorance.
Edexcel defines it as:
a hypothetical scenario where individuals agree on the type of society they want from a position where they lack knowledge of their own position in society.
The word hypothetical is important.
The veil of ignorance is a thought experiment used to consider what kind of society rational individuals might choose if they did not know where they themselves would end up within that society.
What do people behind the veil not know?
The specification requires the general principle that individuals lack knowledge of their own position in society.
You do not need to add a detailed list of characteristics beyond this wording.
The key point is that individuals cannot design society simply around a known position they personally occupy.
For revision purposes:
Normally:
"I know my position in society, so I may favour arrangements that benefit that position."
Behind the veil of ignorance:
"I do not know my position, so I must consider what type of society I would agree to without knowing where I will personally belong within it."
Why does the veil matter?
The veil of ignorance connects directly to fairness and impartiality.
Liberal equality and social justice require individuals to be treated impartially and fairly.
If people do not know their own position when agreeing what society should look like, they cannot simply base their decision on a known personal advantage.
The reasoning is:
Individuals must decide what type of society they want.
They do not know what their own position in that society will be.
They therefore cannot confidently design the system to benefit their known social position.
This provides a way of thinking about what a just society might look like.
The veil of ignorance therefore supports Rawls's wider theory of justice.
Theory of justice and veil of ignorance together
Do not learn Rawls's two ideas as completely separate definitions.
They fit together:
Theory of justice
Society should be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living.
Veil of ignorance
A hypothetical situation for considering what type of society individuals would agree to without knowing their own position within it.
Together:
How can individuals think impartially about a just society?
↓
Imagine that they do not know their own future position
↓
They agree upon the type of society they want
↓
This helps illustrate Rawls's concern with justice and fairness
Rawls and rationalism
Rawls's veil of ignorance also connects to the liberal belief in rationalism.
Liberalism holds that individuals are capable of reason and logic and can determine their own interests and make moral choices.
The veil of ignorance asks individuals to reason about the type of society they would agree to under particular hypothetical conditions.
Rawls therefore remains firmly within the wider liberal tradition:
individuals possess reason
individuals make choices
those choices can be used to consider how society should be organised
justice remains focused on the position of individual citizens
Rawls and liberal equality
Rawls is particularly useful when a question asks about social justice or disagreements concerning equality.
All liberals accept that individuals have equal value. However, liberalism contains different interpretations of what is required to make that equality meaningful.
The specification distinguishes:
foundational equality
formal equality
equality of opportunity
Rawls's specified ideas push the debate towards the broader question:
What does a just society owe its individual citizens?
His answer, within the exact specification wording, is that society must be just and must guarantee each citizen a life worth living.
Betty Friedan
The two ideas specified for Betty Friedan are:
Legal equality
Equal opportunity
Friedan is particularly useful when explaining how modern liberal concerns about equality relate to the individual's ability to realise their potential.
Friedan's legal equality
Edexcel defines Friedan's idea of legal equality through two linked claims:
women are as capable as men
oppressive laws and social views must be overturned
The starting point is therefore individual capability.
Friedan rejects the idea that women should be treated as less capable than men.
Capability and liberal rationalism
Friedan's argument connects with the wider liberal view that human beings are rational and capable of making choices for themselves.
If women are as capable as men, legal or social restrictions that deny them opportunities cannot be justified simply by assuming that women are inherently less able.
The chain is:
Women are as capable as men
↓
women should be treated as rational individuals
↓
oppressive laws and social views restrict their freedom
↓
those barriers should be overturned
This places Friedan within the liberal commitment to individualism and equality.
Legal equality and formal equality
Be careful with terminology here.
Legal equality is the specific label Edexcel gives to Friedan's thinker content.
Formal equality is a wider liberal concept defined in the glossary as the idea that all individuals have the same legal and political rights in society.
The concepts clearly connect, but they should not simply be treated as two names for exactly the same specification point.
A precise exam sentence might say:
Friedan's demand for legal equality reflects the wider liberal commitment to formal equality because she argues that oppressive laws limiting women must be overturned.
The 2023 examiner report specifically advises that Friedan can be used when discussing formal equality as well as equal opportunity.
Friedan and social views
Friedan's specified argument goes beyond laws alone.
Edexcel also requires students to understand her belief that oppressive social views must be overturned.
This matters because an individual can face barriers even where the issue is not simply one formal law.
A society may legally permit a choice while social expectations continue to restrict what individuals are regarded as capable of doing.
Friedan therefore draws attention to barriers that can stop individuals from exercising meaningful choice.
Friedan's equal opportunity
Friedan's second specified idea is equal opportunity.
Edexcel states that:
women are being held back from their potential because of the limited number of jobs that are regarded as "acceptable" for women.
This directly connects Friedan to the wider liberal principle of equality of opportunity.
The Edexcel glossary defines equality of opportunity as the idea that all individuals should have equal chances in life to rise and fall.
Equal opportunity and potential
The word potential is particularly important in Friedan's specified content.
Women may possess equal ability but still be prevented from fulfilling that ability if only a limited range of careers is considered acceptable for them.
The problem can therefore be expressed as:
Equal capability
does not automatically create
equal opportunity
if social restrictions prevent individuals from using that capability.
Friedan and meritocracy
Equality of opportunity connects with the liberal idea of meritocracy.
Edexcel defines meritocracy as a society in which success is based on ability and hard work.
Friedan's argument illustrates why equality of opportunity matters to such a society.
If jobs are restricted according to expectations about whether they are "acceptable" for women, success is not being determined solely by individual ability and effort.
A genuinely meritocratic society requires individuals to have the opportunity to use their abilities.
Equality of opportunity is not equality of outcome
⚠️ This distinction is essential.
Friedan argues that women should not be held back from their potential by restrictions on acceptable employment.
This is an argument about opportunity, not a claim that every individual must achieve exactly the same result.
Edexcel defines equality of opportunity as equal chances to rise and fall.
A liberal meritocracy may therefore produce different outcomes while still insisting that individuals should have genuine opportunities.
Friedan and developmental individualism
Friedan is especially useful for illustrating developmental individualism.
Developmental individualism means individual freedom is linked to human flourishing.
Friedan's equal opportunity argument focuses precisely on individuals being prevented from reaching their potential.
The relationship is:
Developmental individualism
↓
individuals should be able to flourish
↓
women should not be restricted by oppressive laws or social views
↓
they require equal opportunity
↓
individuals can pursue their potential
This makes Friedan especially relevant to modern liberalism.
Friedan and positive freedom
Friedan also fits the modern liberal idea of positive freedom.
Positive freedom means personal fulfilment and the realisation of potential.
Her argument that women are held back from their potential because only certain jobs are considered acceptable shows why simply being technically "left alone" may not provide genuine freedom.
An individual may need barriers to opportunity to be removed before they can fully develop.
Friedan and modern liberalism
Modern liberalism developed from the belief that individual freedom could not always be defined simply as being left alone.
Friedan illustrates this in relation to equality.
If oppressive laws or social expectations restrict the careers individuals can pursue, formal non-interference alone may not produce genuine opportunity.
Modern liberalism therefore places greater emphasis on:
developmental individualism
positive freedom
equality of opportunity
removing barriers that prevent individuals fulfilling their potential
Past Edexcel mark schemes have used Friedan as an appropriate thinker when discussing modern liberalism, equality and the need to support individuals who face barriers to freedom.
Rawls and Friedan compared
Rawls and Friedan focus on different aspects of modern liberalism, but their arguments share a clear concern with meaningful individual freedom.
Rawls | Friedan |
Focuses on a just society | Focuses on barriers affecting women's equality |
Society must guarantee each citizen a life worth living | Women are as capable as men |
Uses the veil of ignorance to consider society impartially | Oppressive laws and social views must be overturned |
Strong link to social justice | Strong link to legal equality |
Can illustrate developmental individualism | Strongly illustrates developmental individualism |
Can illustrate positive freedom | Equal opportunity allows potential to be realised |
What unites Rawls and Friedan?
Both thinkers remain focused on individual people.
Rawls argues that each citizen should be guaranteed a life worth living.
Friedan argues that women should not be prevented from realising their individual potential.
Both therefore reinforce the modern liberal argument that genuine liberty involves more than the simple absence of direct interference.
Rawls, Friedan and equality
Equality is one of the most useful themes for comparing these thinkers.
Rawls
Rawls approaches equality through justice.
His theory asks what a just society should guarantee to each citizen, and his veil of ignorance provides a hypothetical way of considering society without knowing one's own position.
Friedan
Friedan approaches equality through legal status and opportunity.
She argues that:
women are as capable as men
oppressive laws and social views should be overturned
women should not be prevented from fulfilling their potential because certain occupations are judged unacceptable for them
Their arguments therefore approach equality differently while sharing a liberal concern with fair treatment of individuals.
Three forms of liberal equality
The wider liberalism specification requires you to distinguish:
Type of equality | Meaning |
Foundational equality | Rights possessed by all humans by virtue of being born and which cannot be taken away |
Formal equality | The same legal and political rights for all individuals |
Equality of opportunity | Equal chances in life to rise and fall |
Rawls and Friedan can then help develop the wider debate.
Friedan has particularly direct connections to formal equality and equality of opportunity.
Rawls provides a broader modern liberal argument about justice and fair social arrangements.
Modern liberals and equality
Classical and modern liberals share some important commitments on equality.
A previous Edexcel mark scheme identified agreement between classical and modern liberals over the importance of foundational and formal equality, alongside belief in meritocracy.
The important division is therefore not:
Classical liberals oppose equality, modern liberals support it.
That would be inaccurate.
Instead, modern liberalism tends to take a wider view of what may be necessary to make individual freedom and opportunity meaningful.
Equality as an area of liberal unity
All liberals begin with the principle that individuals are of equal value.
This creates agreement over important ideas such as:
foundational equality
formal equality
impartial treatment
meritocracy
the importance of individuals being judged by their own ability rather than inherited or imposed status
Rawls and Friedan do not reject this liberal foundation.
Equality as an area of liberal disagreement
The division appears when liberals ask:
How much must society or the state do to make equality meaningful?
Classical liberals give greater priority to:
self-reliance
negative freedom
the minimal state
Modern liberals place greater emphasis on:
developmental individualism
positive freedom
the enabling state
Rawls and Friedan can therefore be used to show how modern liberalism extends the liberal equality debate beyond simply having the same formal status.
Rawls and the enabling state
Rawls's concern that society should guarantee each citizen a life worth living is compatible with a modern liberal enabling state.
Edexcel mark schemes have explicitly connected Rawls with the modern liberal position that the state can support individual freedom, rather than simply restrict it.
This gives you a useful contrast:
Classical liberalism: A larger state may threaten liberty.
Modern liberalism: A state can sometimes enable the conditions in which individuals become genuinely free.
Friedan and the enabling state
Friedan's specified argument identifies oppressive laws as one barrier that must be overturned.
This clearly means political and legal arrangements can affect whether individuals have genuine opportunities.
Her criticism of restrictive social views also shows that barriers to freedom are not limited to government action.
Friedan can therefore support a modern liberal argument that individuals may need active barriers to their development removed rather than merely being promised non-interference.
Rawls and positive freedom
Rawls is useful in an essay about positive freedom because his theory considers whether society guarantees individuals lives worth living.
That goes beyond a purely negative definition of liberty.
Edexcel mark schemes have directly connected Rawls with the modern liberal position that welfare and an enabling state may help individuals develop their abilities and maximise freedom.
Friedan and positive freedom
The connection is even more explicit with Friedan.
Her equality of opportunity argument states that women are being held back from their potential.
Positive freedom is defined as personal fulfilment and the realisation of potential.
This makes a strong examination connection:
Friedan → equal opportunity → removal of barriers → realisation of potential → positive freedom
Rawls and Friedan versus Locke, Wollstonecraft and Mill
It is useful to compare the five liberal thinkers without pretending they fit into perfectly separate camps.
The previous lesson on liberal thinkers and individual freedom focused on:
Locke's social contract and limited government
Wollstonecraft's reason and formal equality
Mill's harm principle and tolerance
Rawls and Friedan allow you to extend those ideas.
Locke and Rawls
Locke is particularly useful for explaining why government must be limited.
Rawls helps illustrate why modern liberals may nevertheless accept a larger enabling state.
This produces a useful classical-modern comparison.
Wollstonecraft and Friedan
Both can be used in debates about equality.
Wollstonecraft:
women are rational and independent
women require full civil liberties
formal equality
Friedan:
women are as capable as men
oppressive laws and social views must be overturned
equal opportunity
restrictions on acceptable employment hold women back from their potential
The 2023 examiner report specifically recommends using Wollstonecraft for formal equality and Friedan for formal equality and equal opportunity, while warning against allowing a liberalism essay to become an unrelated feminism essay.
Formal equality versus equal opportunity
This distinction is particularly useful when comparing Wollstonecraft and Friedan.
Formal equality asks:
Do individuals possess the same legal and political rights?
Equality of opportunity asks:
Do individuals have an equal chance to rise and fall?
An individual might therefore possess formal legal rights while still facing barriers that restrict their opportunities.
This helps explain why modern liberal discussions of equality can extend beyond formal legal status.
Equality of opportunity and human flourishing
The relationship between equality and individualism is fundamental.
For modern liberals, equality of opportunity does not replace individualism.
It is intended to make developmental individualism possible.
The argument is:
Individuals differ in choices and abilities
↓
but should have genuine opportunities
↓
they should not be held back by artificial barriers
↓
they can develop their individual potential
↓
freedom and human flourishing increase
Friedan is especially useful for illustrating this chain.
Equality of opportunity and meritocracy
Modern liberal support for equality of opportunity remains compatible with the idea of a meritocracy.
Meritocracy means success is based on ability and hard work.
Equal opportunity therefore aims to ensure that individuals have the chance to succeed rather than guaranteeing that everybody reaches the same final position.
This distinction helps separate liberal equality from an argument for identical outcomes.
Rawls and debates over meritocracy
Rawls's theory of justice raises the broader liberal question of what makes the social framework itself just.
The specification does not require additional Rawlsian principles beyond the theory of justice and veil of ignorance.
For examination purposes, keep the argument within the required boundary:
individuals are of equal value
society must be just
each citizen should be guaranteed a life worth living
the veil of ignorance provides a hypothetical scenario for agreeing what kind of society should exist without knowing one's own position
⚠️ Do not add additional Rawlsian theories or terminology that are not listed in the Edexcel specification.
Friedan and debates over meritocracy
Friedan is useful for showing why formal claims of meritocracy may not be enough if social barriers restrict who can compete.
If women are equally capable but only a restricted number of careers are considered acceptable for them, individual outcomes cannot be based entirely on ability and hard work.
Removing those restrictions supports equality of opportunity.
Modern liberalism and the state
Both Rawls and Friedan help illustrate why modern liberals may see the state differently from classical liberals.
Modern liberalism developed because simply being left alone was considered insufficient to make all individuals free.
The state can therefore potentially:
contribute to a just society
remove oppressive legal barriers
help create conditions in which individuals can develop
However, modern liberals remain liberals. The state must still serve individuals rather than becoming an end in itself.
Modern liberalism and the economy
Rawls is also useful when examining liberal divisions over the economy.
Previous Edexcel mark schemes connect Rawls with the modern liberal acceptance of:
an enabling state
greater state involvement
welfare as a means through which individuals may develop their skills and talents
positive freedom
The important examination connection is:
Rawls → modern liberalism → justice → enabling state → positive freedom
You do not need additional economic theories attributed specifically to Rawls beyond those supported by the specification and mark schemes.
How Rawls and Friedan fit together
A helpful summary is:
Rawls asks:
What makes society just?
Society should guarantee each citizen a life worth living, and the veil of ignorance provides a hypothetical way of thinking about social arrangements impartially.
Friedan asks:
What prevents individuals from having genuine equality?
Oppressive laws and social views must be overturned, and women should not be prevented from fulfilling their potential by restrictions on acceptable occupations.
Together, they support the modern liberal position that freedom and equality must have practical meaning for individuals.
A modern liberal chain
The links between the ideas can be summarised as:
Individuals are rational and of equal value
↓
individuals should have genuine freedom
↓
freedom involves human flourishing
↓
this produces developmental individualism
↓
freedom can include personal fulfilment and realisation of potential
↓
this supports positive freedom
↓
society should be just and individuals should have equal opportunities
↓
the state may sometimes need to act as an enabling state
Rawls and Friedan can both be used to support different parts of this modern liberal argument.
Using Rawls in an examination
Rawls is most useful when a question involves:
equality
social justice
the state
positive freedom
modern liberalism
liberal democracy
classical versus modern liberalism
The 2025 examiner report noted that candidates successfully used Rawls in relation to the scope of democracy, while the mark scheme connected his theory of justice with modern liberal willingness to accept a wider role for government.A strong use of Rawls might look like:
Modern liberals take a broader view of freedom than classical liberals. Rawls's theory of justice argues that society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living, illustrating the modern liberal belief that genuine liberty may require social conditions which enable individuals to flourish.
Using Friedan in an examination
Friedan is most useful when a question involves:
equality
equality of opportunity
formal or legal equality
developmental individualism
positive freedom
modern liberalism
A strong use might look like:
Friedan illustrates the modern liberal commitment to developmental individualism because she argues that women are prevented from fulfilling their potential when only a limited range of jobs is considered acceptable for them. Equal opportunity therefore helps individuals realise their abilities rather than merely providing formal freedom.
Do not force Friedan into every liberalism essay
The 2025 examiner report noted that Friedan was the least-used thinker in the democracy question, which was understandable given that particular question.
This is useful examination advice.
You are not rewarded simply for naming every thinker.
Use the thinker whose specified ideas genuinely help answer the question.
Thinkers exemplify liberalism
Edexcel's specification requires the key thinkers to exemplify the core principles and divisions of liberalism.
Your essay should therefore normally follow this direction:
Liberal principle or division
↓
explanation
↓
relevant thinker
↓
comparison
↓
judgement
Not:
Rawls paragraph
↓
Friedan paragraph
↓
Locke paragraph
The political idea is the focus. The thinker provides evidence and illustration.
The definitions follow the specified Rawls and Friedan content and Edexcel's liberalism glossary.
Hints from the Examiner Reports đź’ˇ
Examiner hint:Â Keep Friedan inside the liberalism question.
The 2023 examiner report specifically warns that Wollstonecraft and Friedan should be used sensibly and not in a way that turns a Liberalism essay into a Feminism essay. It recommends Friedan particularly for discussion of formal equality and equal opportunity.
For example, if the question is about liberal equality, explain how Friedan's arguments illustrate a liberal debate about individual opportunity rather than changing the focus to a different ideology.
Examiner hint:Â Use thinkers to support an argument, not as the essay structure.
The 2025 examiner report praised high-level Political Ideas responses where issues were explored thematically, thinkers supported the analysis, and both agreement and disagreement were considered.
For an equality question, themes might include:
equal moral worth
legal and formal equality
equality of opportunity
the role of the state in making freedom meaningful
Rawls and Friedan can then be inserted where relevant.
Examiner hint:Â Answer the precise question rather than reproducing a prepared essay.
The 2025 report found that some candidates attempted to answer a question about democracy with a pre-prepared answer about the state. Stronger candidates adapted their knowledge to the issue actually being tested.
If the question asks about equality, every reference to Rawls or Friedan must help you reach a judgement about equality.
Examiner hint:Â Accuracy matters more than the number of thinkers named.
Examiners recommend that students are confident about the core ideas as laid out in the specification.
For Rawls, stay with:
theory of justice
veil of ignorance
For Friedan, stay with:
legal equality
equal opportunity
Do not rely on extra terminology that Edexcel has not specified.
Examiner hint:Â Political Ideas questions require both analysis and sustained judgement.
Edexcel's marking guidance allocates 8 marks each to AO1, AO2 and AO3. Candidates must analyse perspectives that support and reject the view in the question and reach a reasoned judgement.
This means knowing Rawls's definition is only AO1. You must then use it to make a connection or comparison and use that analysis to support a judgement.
Examiner hint:Â Balance means considering both unity and division within the ideology.
The 2025 report explicitly advises students to examine both agreement and disagreement between ideological strands in detail. AO3 was strongest where evaluation was evidenced and sustained throughout rather than simply asserted.
For equality, avoid saying "modern liberals care about equality but classical liberals do not". Instead, explain where they agree and then identify where modern liberalism extends the argument.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Adding extra Rawlsian theories that are not required
Why this is incorrect: Edexcel specifically requires Rawls's theory of justice and veil of ignorance and tells students to focus on the listed key ideas rather than detailed additional material.
How to improve:
Base your Rawls revision around two precise definitions:
society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living
the veil of ignorance removes knowledge of one's own position when deciding what society should be like
Mistake: Saying the veil of ignorance means people know nothing
Why this is incorrect: The specification is more precise. Individuals lack knowledge of their own position in society.
How to improve: Use the exact idea: they agree on the type of society they want without knowing their own social position.
Mistake: Treating the veil of ignorance and theory of justice as unrelated
Why this is incorrect: The veil is a hypothetical way of considering what type of society individuals would agree to, while the theory of justice establishes the importance of a just society.
How to improve:
Link them:
veil of ignorance → impartial consideration of society → theory of justice
Mistake: Calling Friedan's specified idea "formal equality" without qualification
Why this is incorrect: Edexcel labels Friedan's thinker idea legal equality. Formal equality is a wider liberal glossary term.
How to improve: Be precise:
Friedan's legal equality reflects the wider liberal principle of formal equality.
Mistake: Treating Friedan's equal opportunity as equality of outcome
Why this is incorrect: Equality of opportunity concerns equal chances to rise and fall, not identical final results.
How to improve: Link equal opportunity to meritocracy, where success is based on ability and hard work.
Mistake: Saying modern liberalism rejects individualism
Why this is incorrect: Modern liberals adopt developmental individualism. The individual remains central, but freedom is connected to human flourishing.
How to improve: Explain that Rawls and Friedan support a different form of individualism, not its abandonment.
Mistake: Saying classical liberals oppose all equality
Why this is incorrect: Past Edexcel mark schemes identify agreement between classical and modern liberals over foundational and formal equality.
How to improve: Explain that the disagreement is more about how far equality and state action should extend in order to make individual freedom meaningful.
Mistake: Turning a Rawls or Friedan paragraph into biography
Why this is incorrect: The specification explicitly states that detailed biographical information is not the focus.
How to improve: Use this formula:
specified idea → liberal principle → strand → question
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define Rawls's theory of justice. (1 mark)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer:
The view that society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living.
Question 2
State one feature of Rawls's veil of ignorance. (1 mark)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer:
Individuals agree on the type of society they want without knowing their own position in society.
Question 3
Explain how Rawls's veil of ignorance relates to his theory of justice. (4 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
Rawls argues that society should be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living. The veil of ignorance is a hypothetical scenario in which individuals decide what kind of society they want without knowing their own position within it. This prevents them from simply choosing arrangements designed around a known personal position and helps illustrate how a just society might be considered impartially.
Question 4
Explain the relationship between Friedan's legal equality and equal opportunity. (4 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
Friedan argues that women are as capable as men and that oppressive laws and social views should be overturned, demonstrating legal equality. She also argues that women are held back from their potential because only a limited number of jobs are considered acceptable for them. Removing these restrictions therefore promotes equal opportunity as well as equality before the law.
Question 5
Consider the following scenario:
A society legally allows women and men to apply for all occupations. However, strong social expectations mean that only a small number of careers are regarded as suitable for women, regardless of their individual ability.
Using Friedan's ideas, explain why a liberal could argue that equality has not yet been fully achieved. (6 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
Friedan argues that women are as capable as men and that oppressive social views, as well as oppressive laws, should be overturned. Although the scenario suggests legal barriers have been removed, social expectations still limit the careers regarded as acceptable for women. This prevents women from fully realising their potential and therefore restricts equal opportunity. Legal equality alone has not removed all barriers to individual development.
Question 6
Consider the following scenario:
A group of rational individuals must design the basic form of a new society. Before making their decision, they are told that none of them will know what position they personally will occupy within that society.
Explain how Rawls could use this scenario to develop an argument about justice. (6 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
The scenario reflects Rawls's veil of ignorance because individuals agree on the type of society they want without knowing their own position within it. They therefore cannot simply design society around a position they know they will occupy. The scenario can be used to consider social arrangements more impartially and connects to Rawls's theory of justice, which states that society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living.
Question 7
Analyse how Rawls and Friedan illustrate the modern liberal understanding of freedom. (8 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Strong answers should explain that:
modern liberalism developed from the belief that freedom could not simply mean being left alone
modern liberalism is associated with developmental individualism
developmental individualism connects freedom to human flourishing
modern liberals therefore support positive freedom
Rawls argues that society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living
this reflects concern with the actual conditions in which individuals live
Friedan argues that women are as capable as men and that oppressive laws and social views should be overturned
her equal opportunity argument focuses on barriers preventing women from realising their potential
both can therefore illustrate the modern liberal belief that genuine freedom may require the conditions that enable individuals to flourish
Higher-level responses should explicitly connect the thinkers to developmental individualism, positive freedom and the enabling state rather than simply describing their ideas separately.
Question 8
To what extent are liberals united in their ideas about equality?
You must use appropriate thinkers you have studied to support your answer and consider both sides in a balanced way. (24 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme
Areas of agreement
Liberals broadly agree that:
individuals are of equal value
society should treat individuals impartially and fairly
foundational equality is important
formal equality is important
individuals should not be denied rights simply because of their social status or group
meritocracy should allow success to relate to individual ability and hard work
Wollstonecraft can illustrate formal equality through her argument that rational and independent women should possess full civil liberties.
Friedan reinforces the importance of legal equality through her argument that women are as capable as men and that oppressive laws should be overturned.
Rawls can support the shared liberal concern with fairness because his theory of justice requires society to be just.
A previous Edexcel mark scheme explicitly identified agreement between modern and classical liberals over foundational and formal equality.
Areas of disagreement
The strongest divisions concern how far equality should extend and what is required to make it meaningful.
Classical liberals place stronger emphasis on:
egoistical individualism
self-reliance
negative freedom
the minimal state
Modern liberals place stronger emphasis on:
developmental individualism
positive freedom
equality of opportunity
the enabling state
Rawls illustrates the modern liberal position through his theory that society must be just and guarantee each citizen a life worth living.
Friedan illustrates it particularly clearly through equal opportunity because women may possess ability while still being prevented from fulfilling their potential by restrictive social expectations.
Useful comparison: Wollstonecraft and Friedan
Wollstonecraft can be used to demonstrate the importance of formal equality.
Friedan allows the argument to develop further towards equal opportunity.
A strong comparison might argue:
Liberals are strongly united in rejecting legal inequality, but modern liberals place greater emphasis on whether individuals possess genuine opportunities to use their legal freedom.
Useful comparison: classical and modern liberalism
The central disagreement is not whether equality matters.
Instead:
Classical liberal question:
Are individuals legally free and protected from unnecessary interference?
Modern liberal question:
Do individuals also possess genuine opportunities to develop and fulfil their potential?
This creates a difference of extent rather than complete ideological opposition.
AO2 analysis
A strong paragraph might argue:
Both classical and modern liberals accept formal equality because liberal individualism requires people to possess the same legal and political status. However, Friedan demonstrates why modern liberalism goes further by emphasising equal opportunity. If women possess legal rights but continue to be restricted to a narrow range of socially acceptable careers, they may remain unable to fulfil their individual potential. The division therefore concerns whether formal equality alone is sufficient.
Another paragraph could use Rawls:
Rawls's theory of justice develops the modern liberal position by asking whether society is sufficiently just to guarantee each citizen a life worth living. This goes beyond the classical liberal emphasis on removing external restrictions, demonstrating why modern liberals are more willing to support an enabling state.
AO3 evaluation
A strong overall judgement could conclude that liberalism is more united over the principle of equality than over its practical requirements.
All liberals accept the equal moral importance of individuals and broadly support foundational and formal equality.
However, modern liberals extend the principle further through:
positive freedom
developmental individualism
equality of opportunity
social justice
the enabling state
Rawls and Friedan therefore reveal a significant modern liberal development.
A reasoned conclusion might be:
Liberalism is substantially united in believing that individuals possess equal value and should enjoy equal legal status. The deeper disagreement concerns whether those formal principles are sufficient. Modern liberals such as Rawls and Friedan argue that justice and genuine opportunity matter because legal freedom has limited value if individuals cannot achieve a life worth living or realise their potential. Liberal division therefore concerns the depth of equality required, rather than the fundamental principle that individuals are equal.
For Edexcel's 24-mark Core Political Ideas questions, students must use knowledge to underpin analysis and evaluation, consider both sides of the debate and reach a reasoned judgement. Examiner feedback consistently recommends a thematic approach in which thinkers support the argument rather than becoming separate mini-essays.
Comments