5.2 Value profile: justice  (Page 4/8)

Justice, rawls, and the veil of ignorance

Rawls on justice

• Equality : the benefits, harms, and risks of social cooperation are distributed equally among members of the social group.
• Merit : the greatest share goes to those who deserve it. Merit can be defined in terms of knowledge, skill, productivity or even moral virtue.
• Need : the greatest share goes to those who have the greatest need.
• Beauchamp and Bowie add distribution according to rights, effort, and societal contribution. Beauchamp and Bowie, Ethical Theory and Business, 3rd Edition , p. 44.

Rawls then constructs a thought experiment designed to solve this problem of distribution. Imagine a situation where a group of rationally self-interested individuals choose principles of distribution under a veil of ignorance. (This means that individuals will be making this choice unaware of their own special circumstances, for example, whether they will be rich or poor, born in a wealthy nation or in a developing country, endowed with natural talents or handicapped in some way, etc.)

1. Rational self-interest leads us to acquire as many primary goods as possible. These include (a) rights and liberties, (b) opportunities and powers, and (c) income and wealth.
2. Under the veil of ignorance, we pretend to know nothing of our situation. As Rawls puts it, under the veil of ignorance, “no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does any one know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength and the like.” (J. Rawls (1971). A Theory of Justice . Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, p. 12)

The veil of ignorance channels rational self-interest toward an impartial and fair system of distribution. Without the veil of ignorance, those who are rich would gravitate toward a scheme of distribution that maintained and even enhanced their wealth. Those who were poor would opt for a scheme that redistributed the wealth of others to themselves. The scheme could also be shifted towards one’s natural talents: if one were strong, one would choose a system of distribution biased toward strength; if one were intelligent, one would choose a system of distribution that rewarded intelligence; if one were male, one would choose a system that favored men. Rational self interest without the veil of ignorance would bias the principles of justice chosen. But the veil of ignorance pushes rational self-interest toward impartiality because the rationally self-interested individual must choose to protect all possibilities, not knowing in advance which one will apply.

With this in mind, Rawls’ basic position can be summarized in the following manner: