John Rawls Thought Model

Improved Essays
In this essay, I will detail the thought experiment of John Rawls known as “the original position,” the two principles of justice he believes this thought experiment results in, and, lastly, consider one objection to his claims. I argue that Rawls’ thought experiment offers a decent starting point to consider matters of justice and/or good and bad in society, but becomes compromised when we are asked to presume members behind the “veil of ignorance” do not know their conceptions of good. In A Theory of Justice, John Rawls considers the role of justice in society and posits a simple conception of just society. In Rawls’ view, justice depends upon a “scheme of cooperation” that enables all in society to achieve an agreeable existence, or the …show more content…
In A Theory of Justice Rawls states regarding the supposed conditions under the “veil of ignorance,” “I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities.” Though, if persons of society under the “veil of ignorance” do not know their concept of good, how will these persons be able to further good via agreed principles of justice? Perhaps, Rawls would like us to assume that these persons need only understand that they are striving to achieve good and “justice as fairness” within society without knowing what their own conception of good is. Relatively speaking, under the “veil of ignorance,” all may maintain some self-interest such as not dying and having basic needs met such as food, water, and shelter. Though, some other interests may include desiring their society be safe as to protect themselves, their possible kin, and the rest of the equal society. To agree upon principles that would enable a safe society, the rational persons under the “veil of ignorance” would need to have knowledge of behavior or aspects of existence/society that are disagreeable or bad. Further, individual perceptions of what is unpleasant or constitute a just, good society may be dissonant. For example, when making principles of justice under the “veil of ignorance” some may argue that producing and consuming alcohol does not enable a safe society as it may lead to deviant, aggressive behavior or fatality, whilst others may contend it is benign. These views may be based on factors like personal experience, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity. Yet, if rational persons must forsake these influences and their own notions of good under the “veil of ignorance,” how would they be able to determine whether a purported undesirable, like alcohol, should be eliminated or kept when constructing a just society? In Rawls case, it very well may be that rational persons

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Many philosophical scholars believe that justice, liberty, law, and equality are an important aspect among the commonwealth of the nation. Moreover, this paper will focus on the two important political philosophers that argue with the notion and importance of equality and justice in the western society. These philosophers include: Robert Nozick and John Rawls. John Rawls claims that equality and justice is derived from an equal distribution of opportunities, income, wealth, for the general social advantage of the citizen, which includes welfare. Whereas, Robert Nozick defines equality and justice as an entailment to oneself.…

    • 320 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He argues that a person's liberty is what is most important and should be a priority. The second principle is called the “Difference Principle” which requires social and economic inequalities to be modified so that they can produce an outcome that is fair and equal to all. Rawls’ notion of justice as fairness demands that distribution of the goods of society should be consciously structured in order to provide a fair distribution. His last argument ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in society, this is called the social contract theory. The “original position” is the main component on Rawls’ social contract account of justice, it allows us to figure out what principle of justice people in society would agree to if we lived in a society of total freedom.…

    • 715 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Although his critique of mass incarceration maybe harsh under several of his principles the problem can be fixed. Rawls suggestion is that you imagine yourself in an original position in society under a veil of ignorance. Being behind the veil means that you do not know anything about yourself and your natural abilities. You also are unaware of your race, sex, nationality, and talents. In other words, you are being born into the world blind to everything.…

    • 676 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In his work, Theory of Justice, John Rawls describes two principles in which he describes his theory for distributive justice. Rawls interprets the goods described in distributive justice as the power and wealth that stem from institutional positions. The first principle asserts that, “each individual has an equal right to the most extensive liberty compatible with like liberty for all”. (503)…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    One of the main focuses of John Rawls Veil of Ignorance is removing yourself from the situation and making an unbiased decision that makes the most sense for everyone involved in the situation. Rawls' Veil of Ignorance "asks readers to decide what rules of distributive justice should apply to society" (Sanger & Rossiter, 2011, p.380). This means that before making a decision, you must put yourself in the shoes of every person involved to try to find a solution that benefits everyone equally. If I were in the situation of the editor and had a to fix an overtime problem the first step for me would be to completely remove myself from the equation and make an objective decision by considering the impact that my decision would make on everyone…

    • 1450 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    And after going through the veil of ignorance the reasoner would create prescriptions of what people would do. Mills’ argument against this may not be warranted because I do not know if the idealized reasoner can account for the subjective differences actual reasoners would have when coming out of the veil of ignorance. However, under the veil I can assume that people with even with subjective differences will calculate the best possible prescription for all people. Even if there are people who are disadvantaged at the end, a actual reasoner who may even be the most disadvantaged would reason such that even they would…

    • 1874 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Conception Of Unequal

    • 231 Words
    • 1 Pages

    Rawls theory of “general conception of justice” is that all primary social goods are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution is to the benefit of everyone. Because of the fact that each person would wish to advance their own conception of primary goods, in the original position they don’t know what these are, each person would find it rational to maximize his share of primary goods and would find it reasonable to not ask for more or feel like are they settling for less than any other person an expect for others to be just as equal as them. So the over all idea is the equal shares between everyone. Likewise, with the “special conception” Rawls brings into the argument the “difference principle”. This principle brings in the…

    • 231 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Great Essays

    Before Rawls’s conception of justice and the difference principle, the utilitarian principle was often used in politics justifying inequalities if they made all of us better off. Rawls twist on this is that it is not enough that it should make all of us better off it must make the worst off as well off as possible. Rawls believed in justice…

    • 1636 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    The first objection is that Rawl's is unable to limit the range of distributive justice solely to the doctrine of institutions. The second objection is that Rawl's wrongly pairs justice with practice leading to political principles. The purpose of this essay is to examine in further detail G.A. Cohen…

    • 1483 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Based off his own views of fairness and justice, Rawls would consider Rousseau’s ideal society fair. This conclusion is only made when considering what is at the core of Rawls’ desire for fairness: justice. Rousseau’s emphasis on security is of little concern to Rawls. However, Rousseau’s belief of liberties and equality follow Rawls’ own belief of fairness as justice. For Rawls, a practice is fair when none of those participating in it feel they are not only being compelled to give in to illegitimate claims, but also feeling they are being taken advantage of.…

    • 1251 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    John Rawls theory of social justice developed over time with the publishing of various books he wrote, such as A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism. In A Theory of Justice, he determines the “Circumstances of Justice.” These circumstances assume justice applies to a “definite geographical territory and that the subjects of justice are “roughly similar in…

    • 1320 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Regardless what one’s culture or religious framework might be, there is a communality that allows us to have the capacity for justice that can be differentiated from our personal capacity for the good. If we can agree on the moral structure of notions of freedom and equality and cooperation, then we can agree on the basic structure of a democratic society. If we agree with Rawls on the concept of person in a non-metaphysical way and the person can grasp what the fair terms of cooperation are and abide by them, then we can have a minimal conception of society. The capacity of the conception of the good does not require that we engage in sophisticated moral thinking, but it requires the capacity to evaluate this scheme as fair (or…

    • 426 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rawls then goes on to describe what it means to be a citizen in his ideal democracy: “First, citizens are free in that they conceive of themselves and of one another as having the moral power to have a conception of the good… they regard themselves as self-originating sources of valid claims… they are regarded as capable of taking responsibility for their ends.” What he means by all of this is that citizens must act by their own free will in order to pursue their perceptions of “the good,” but they should still be able to adjust these aspirations in lieu of justice and social cooperation. In short, Rawls argues…

    • 1550 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Rawl's Theory Of Justice

    • 980 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In contemporary philosophical debate, there are hardly any concepts that congregate common agreements as the Justice as Fairness. The moral philosophers-from utilitarians to Kantians-, acknowledged that justice and equality are morally demanded. The contemporary philosophical perspectives on this debate will be referred to the principle of Rawl’s theory of Justice as Fairness. John Rawls has, in miscellaneous works and in his book A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, 1971) protected the perspective that “justice generally requires that basic social goods – liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self-respect – be equally distributed, unless an unequal distribution is to everyone’s advantage.”…

    • 980 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    To justify this Rawls expounded articulately in Political Liberalism, “the principles of these conceptions of justice must also satisfy the criterion of reciprocity.” This criterion of reciprocity requires that, when terms are proposed by one party as the most reasonable terms of fair cooperation. “Those who proposing them must think reasonable for others to accept them, as free and equal citizens, and not as dominated or manipulated or under pressure caused by an inferior political or social position.” Each of these citizens are free and equal persons of a given society and there has to be fair terms of cooperation. The persons are reasonable in a basic aspect that they are ready to propose principles and standards as fair terms of cooperation.…

    • 1899 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays