Rawls advances his argument with a unique pattern of reasoning, one he sees as securing liberty and opportunity while justifying differences in rewards. This is his “veil of ignorance” argument in “A Theory of Justice”. While the “veil of ignorance” argument is poorly named—it sounds….stupid—it really isn’t.
If,
- We pretend we do not know who we are in certain basic ways
- We are avoiding risk to ourselves and our possible children
- So: We will choose principles of justice that maximally protect everyone
- This not biased for or against anyone (we don’t know who we are)
- Not biased is fair
- Inequalities in rewards—wealth, prestige, power—are inevitable for humans
- We will have identified fair principles
- Justice is fairness
- So: We will have discovered the true Principles of Justice
The principles he believes most every reasonable person will reach are,
- Liberty principle. Everyone is free to pursue their vision of a good life as long as this does not exclude others from doing the same. Not to be compromised under any circumstances including the demands of 2a and 2b below..
- Everyone is to have fair equal opportunity for jobs and political power (2a).
- All differences in reward—wealth, prestige/fame and power are to be arranged so we make the worst off as best off as we can (2b).
2b is especially fascinating.