John Rawls 'Veil Of Ignorance'

John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.

The veil allows for equality and ensures that no advantaged nor disadvantaged individual will be swayed to decide a certain way on a principle due to their natural and social biases in society. One example given in Rawls’ work deals with two men; one man is wealthy while the other man is poor. As the topic of tax and reform comes up, the wealthy man pleads his case and denounces the tax and welfare system that was in place solely because he did not want his riches taken from him. On the other hand, the poor man pleaded his side of the discussion, fully supporting the tax and welfare system in place, stating that the system is completely just and necessary, therefore causing a split conclusion on the principle due to differences in characteristic bias. Therefore, to solve this difference, Rawls created the notion of the veil of ignorance which gives neither the wealthy man nor the poor man prior knowledge to their financial status (or any other natural/social statuses) allowing the overall greater equality for society to be exposed.

Rawls believes that in a situation where a society is established of people who are self-interested, rational, and equal, the rules of justice are established by what is mutually acceptable and agreed upon by all the people. This scenario of negotiating the laws of that society that will be commonly agreed upon and beneficial to

“Veil of Ignorance” means that personal original position should be ignored before making decision. And “Veil of Ignorance” is for the achievement of justice and fairness. I have same opinion with the majority people that John Rawls’ theory is with the basis of utilitarianism, though Rawls has two principles for arguing the difference between utilitarianism and his own theory.

Veil of Ignorance by John Rawls John Rawls argues in his theory of justice that morally, society should be framed politically as if we were all behind “Veil of Ignorance”; the rules and actions of society should be formed as if we had no prior awareness of our future fortune, talents, and social position, and could be situated in a position to take advantage. Whether one’s decisions have positive or negative effects on oneself is beyond us; However, it should always benefit the society .Veil of Ignorance can be utilized in the position that legislators should take when determining the pattern inflicted on society.

Furthermore, they have no concept of social standing or economic standing. The individuals are just capable of reasoning and possess the goal of creating a just society (Rawls 1971, 17). The purpose of the veil is to allow those in the original position to agree on rules pertaining to their own mutual interests. Rawls thinks that behind the veil of ignorance, free of bias with rational thought, the individuals would agree to a society governed by his two principles of justice (Rawls 1971, 53). Individuals would agree to these principles because it would be the only way to ensure a fair initial status quo in society (Rawls 1971, 53). This is important because it allows for justified inequalities later that will be regulated instead of unjust inequalities. No one would want to make things unequal from the start because they have no way of knowing their actual place in society behind the veil (Rawls 1971, 11). For example, if someone suggested that all UCR students get free tuition at the cost of students at other universities footing the bill, it would be within the individuals best interest to disagree because he has no way of knowing if he is a UCR student in the society or one of the other university students that now have to pay more. The idea of the original position is that a just society would be fair and equal, and individuals behind the veil of ignorance would agree on Rawls’ two principles of justice to make it so.

Rawls is a well-known philosopher, for his significant thought experiments and one of the most important philosophical tools is "veil of ignorance”. Where he proposed this principle or lets say method to determine the morality of a particular situation based on ignorance of some things .As he asks us to imagine a dramatic scenario on how a person wants to organize or even would want a society, if the person were placed in what Rawls call it the original position. Within this position the future citizens or people wouldn’t know yet which part they are playing, what kind of position they will occupy, what are their talents within the society or their upcoming society, where they must design their roles and attributes that will be reassigned

A philosopher, John Rawls, came up with a theory of distributive justice that allows one to choose values with detachment and objectivity in our moral judgments. “Using elements of both Kantian and utilitarian philosophy, Rawls described a method for moral evaluation of social and political institutions” (Kay). These principles “would be universal, respect all persons, and rationally acceptable to all” (DeGeorge 77). Behind an imaginary veil, you would not know your social class, gender, race, natural abilities, and such. You would not know about yourself or your position in society, so you can objectively weigh all sides. Using this principle, “a self-interested rational person behind a veil would not want to belong to a race or gender or sexual orientation that is discriminated against” (Garrett).

Rawls theory was the original position, an experiment which contains the veil of ignorance “the main distinguishing feature of the original position is the veil of ignorance, to ensure impartiality judgment the parties are deprived of all knowledge of their personal characteristics and social and historical circumstances” (Stafford). Rawls elaborates on citizens being able they own goals and interest. He also explains about the fairness of the conditions. He establishes that first, there must be a reasonable condition for replication about what is rational, then you can decide and follow it. He stated how people will accept the original position because they will not that they are in the lowermost level of society or not. Hobbs on another hand feels it better to follow an effective sovereign and more so act only fair to citizens who obey the conclusion rather than personal lead. “To this war of every man against every man, this also is consequent; that nothing can be unjust, the notion of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have there no place. Where there is no power, there is no law; where no law no injustice” (Hobbs). He reaffirms the appropriate way of acting reasonably is without a government. Hobbs theory clashes with Rawls conception of rights, the reason for government and the nature of a person. Hobbs is basically saying that there are no legal or moral boundaries to anything and that every citizen has rights to others lives and everything “In followeth that in such condition every man has right to everything, even to one another’s body’s” (Hobbs). My opinion, Rawls has a better Theory and argument.

The general concept of Rawls “original position” is that all social “Primary Good” should be distributed equally to individuals in a society, unless an unequal distribution favors those less fortunate. Rawls call “the situation of ignorance about your own place in society the “original position (242).” Rawls’ theory is in direct response to John Lock’s principles on social contract which states that people in a free society need to set rules on how to live with one another in peace. Rawls’ principles were designed to guards against injustices, which was inflicted upon society, with the help of John Stuart Mills Utilitarianism principle that individuals should act so as to maximize the greatest good for the greatest number. Mills

John Rawls was an America philosopher whose idea was to develop an experiment for individuals to seek a fair notion of justice. Rawls experiment was a hypothetical one that engaged the individual to look at society and fairness from another perceptive. Individuals were to use their imagination and pretend that they were born into different lives, for example, if their mother was a single parent that worked two jobs just to put food on the table vs. the lavish life style one lives today. Society isn’t just, but if the individuals didn’t know their position or their background it could eliminate discrimination and give rise for equal opportunity for all. Rawls believed in the notion of the social contract theory, if everyone was in agreement they could form a sustainable society. Rawls proposed the government could possibly work for everyone, under these pretenses. Rawls had two key principles which focused on

Rawls calls this feature the “veil of ignorance” (Rawls 15). Behind this “veil of ignorance”, the parties do not know the social position of the person they represent. They also do not know the persons’ race, ethnic group, sex, or intelligence (Rawls 15). The original position has the intention of avoiding the aforementioned difficulties by eliminating the motivation for deception. If one does not know who they are representing, then there is no motivation to choose an option that would suit one type of person better than the other.

Political philosopher John Rawls believed that in order for society to function properly, there needs to be a social contract, which defines ‘justice as fairness’. Rawls believed that the social contract be created from an original position in which everyone decides on the rules for society behind a veil of ignorance. In this essay, it will be argued that the veil of ignorance is an important feature of the original position. First, the essay will describe what the veil of ignorance is. Secondly, it will look at what Rawls means by the original position. Thirdly, it will look at why the veil of ignorance is an important feature of the original position. Finally, the essay will present a criticism to the veil of ignorance and the original

The veil of ignorance is a thought experiment proposed by John Rawls in one of his books, Theory of Justice. According to John Rawls, the veil of ignorance is a technique that is used to help anyone determine whether an action or an institution or such is moral. Thus, using the veil, one can determine the morality of an action or institution.

The foundation of an unbiased society is rooted in the unknown. Not in the sense of common knowledge being unknown, but in the understanding that no person knows their future endeavors individually. Meaning that, “They do not know how the various alternatives will affect their own particular case and they are obliged to evaluate principles solely on the basis of general considerations” (Rawls 118). Yet there are still general conceptions that are known to the people such as, “…general facts about human society. They understand political affairs, and the principles of economic theory; they know the basis of social organization and the laws of human psychology” (Rawls 119). With these core ideals in place, the “veil of ignorance” is revealed. This is the hypothetical situation where the aforementioned concepts are put into place. If the people in a society were unaware of who they were to become, the rules that they chose to make would be beneficial to a larger portion of the people. This comes from the thinking that no one person wants to put themselves at a disadvantage. This plays off the rationale behind the Golden Rule, but in this particular case it is not ‘do unto others as you would have done unto yourself’, it becomes ‘do unto others because you might be one of the others’. Not wanting to wish unfortunate circumstances on oneself there is consideration