John Rawls and the “Veil of Ignorance”
Introduction to John Rawls and the Veil of Ignorance
Speaker and Credentials
Ben Davies
Research Fellow at the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics at the University of Oxford
Focus: Health care justice, human enhancement, animal ethics, and well-being
Contact: benjamin.davies@philosophy.ac.uk
License Information
Work released under a CC-BY license.
Overview of Rawls's Veil of Ignorance
Influence:
The Veil of Ignorance is one of the most influential philosophical ideas of the 20th century.
Purpose:
To work out basic institutions and structures of a just society
Encourages thinking as if building society from the ground up, acceptable to all reasonable individuals.
Key Concept:
Original Position
A hypothetical scenario used by Rawls to conceptualize justice.
Rawls asserts it does not exist in reality, it serves as a framework for thinking about justice.
Conclusion from the Original Position:
Social justice is determined by what reasonable individuals would agree to in the Original Position.
The goal is to make our actual society reflect this ideal.
Design of Society Behind the Veil
Challenges in Designing Society:
Risk of biases and majority tyranny against minority groups when designing social structures.
Assumptions About Society Designers:
Individuals behind the Veil are:
Free and equal.
Motivated by self-interest but willing to engage in reasonable cooperation.
Restrictions on Designers:
They must choose principles from established views within traditional Western philosophy on justice.
Concept of the Veil of Ignorance
Definition:
Imaginary construct to assist in the avoidance of biases in societal design.
Individuals imagine themselves unaware of specific facts about themselves influencing their decisions.
Facts Hidden by the Veil:
Demographic Facts: Gender, race, wealth, personal strengths/weaknesses (intelligence, physical prowess).
Rawls argues these characteristics are morally arbitrary; individuals do not earn them.
Societal Facts:
General knowledge about human life but not the specifics of one’s society organization.
Personal Values:
Preferences about how one's life should go and specific moral/political beliefs are hidden.
Objective of the Veil:
To prevent personal interests from skewing the development of fair societal arrangements.
Ensures fairness by requiring individuals to create arrangements valid for all once the Veil ‘lifts’.
Principles of Justice According to Rawls
Primary Goods:
Key resources that contribute to well-being, include:
Money and other resources
Basic rights and freedoms
“Social bases of self-respect” to feel like an equal member of society.
Decision-Making Principle:
Lack of probabilities leads to a conservative approach called Maximin:
Maximize the minimum outcome for those in the worst-off position.
Two Principles Emerging from the Veil
First Principle:
Each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of basic liberties compatible with others’ liberties.
Second Principle:
Social and economic inequalities must:
Be attached to offices available under fair equality of opportunity.
Benefit the least advantaged member of society (Difference Principle).
Rationale for Principles:
The First Principle emphasizes basic liberties, essential for moral equality.
The Second Principle allows for inequalities that provide broader benefits while ensuring basic fairness.
Detailed Examination of the Second Principle
Fair Equality of Opportunity:
Positions must be available to individuals of equal talent and willingness.
Inequalities based on race, wealth, or background are unjustified if these assumptions hold.
Challenges in Assessment:
Questions persist regarding how to assess equal effort and talent given diverse educational and social backgrounds.
Difference Principle:
Permits inequalities as long as they benefit the least-off by potentially motivating better productivity and generating more Primary Goods.
Criticisms of Rawls's Veil of Ignorance
General Overview:
Rawls faces various criticisms; three significant objections will be discussed:
1. Ownership and Historical Rights
Critique from Robert Nozick:
Rawls’s justice theories overlook existing ownership rights and how goods were attained historically.
Nozick argues that distribution patterns should respect historical ownership established through labor or inheritance.
Self-Ownership:
Nozick posits that individuals own themselves; thus, they also own their labor and products thereof.
Governments have no right to redistribute owned property against individuals' will.
2. Identity and Neutrality
Communitarian Criticism:
Emphasizes that real individuals are shaped by their existing social connections, communities, and cultures, which the Veil ignores.
Challenges the idea that decisions can be made behind the Veil without recognizing the embedded social context.
Implication:
Justice requires consideration of local values and community structures rather than abstract principles.
3. Ideal Justice vs. Non-Ideal World
Real-World Applicability:
Critics argue Rawls’s focus on ideal theories neglects existing injustices such as racism and sexism present in societies.
Raises the fundamental question about the value of a theory of justice not providing solutions to real-world injustices.
Conclusion and Reformulations:
Questions arise regarding adjustments to Rawls’s assumptions and whether they should be radically revised or abandoned.
Conclusion and Reflection
Summary of Key Insights:
Importance of recognizing personal biases when discussing concepts of justice emphasized by the Veil of Ignorance.
Rawls’s framework signals the significance of considering perspectives other than one’s own in discussions of justice.
Crucial Observations:
Balancing between ideal theoretical constructs and acknowledgment of the complexities within real societies remains critical in philosophical discourse.
Reflection Questions for Discussion:
Is the Difference Principle practical and what would individuals agree upon behind the Veil?
Does the Veil of Ignorance meaningfully oversimplify individual identity?
How can Rawls's notion of fair equality of opportunity facilitate real justice in the light of pre-birth influences on talent and inclination?
References
Davies, Ben (2019). “John Rawls and the ‘Veil of Ignorance.’” In Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource, 92–97. Golden West College, Huntington Beach, CA: NGE Far Press.
Various referenced works include significant contributions from John Rawls, Robert Nozick, Charles Taylor, Michael Walzer, and others in philosophical justice discourse.