Rawls: The original position

Do you find Rawls's characterization of the original position, and persons therein, plausible/realistic/sufficient/persuasive?

A useful and worthwhile idea? Yes. A perfect position? No.

Final thought...

§ 30: 'Benevolence is at sea as long as its many loves are in opposition in the persons of its many objects.' - really?

Persuasive?

What is the aim of the original position? Can it plausibly be achieved?

• Yes: veil of ignorance means you choose the best for all; a useful basis for constructing fair principles of justice because the negative effects of self-interest are mitigated
• No: it includes a contradiction to solve the generation problem and maintain that everyone is mutually disinterested; it unrealistically abandons the possibility of envy therefore justifying huge inequalities; it largely assumes that people in the original position have the best chance of coming up with fair principles of justice

§ 3: '... the guiding idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association. ... The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty, assuming for the present that this choice problem has a solution, determines the principles of justice.'

Sufficient?

Is the original position realistic?

• § 4: 'I have said that the original position is the appropriate initial status quo which insures that the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair.'
• Does it insure that? Can mutually disinterested people really make choices for all generations? Can they expect to be free from envy? Can they really be expected to come up with the best way of organizing society fairly?

• No - it is not real... But it's intended hypothetically. § 3: '... the undertakings referred to are purely hypothetical: a contract view holds that certain principles would be accepted in a well-defined situation.'
• Reflective equilibrium, § 4, balancing the contractual circumstances with our judgements.
• Are our aims really represented by rationally, mutually disinterested people under the veil of ignorance?
• Objection: Generation problem § 24: 'Whatever a person's temporal position, each is forced to choose from all.' - contradicting mutual disinterest
• Objection: § 25: 'The special assumption I will make is that a rational individual does not suffer from envy' - what about Wilkinson and Pickett's 'The Spirit Level'?

Rawls: The original position