A Theory of Justice
John Rawls · 1971
"A just society's rules are the ones rational people would agree to from behind a veil of ignorance — not knowing their own future race, class, talents, or position in that society — which Rawls argues would lead them to prioritize basic liberties for all and structure inequality so it benefits society's worst-off members."
Rawls's thought experiment updates the social contract tradition for questions of fairness rather than just order: imagine a group of rational people designing the basic rules of a society, but from behind a veil of ignorance, a hypothetical state where none of them know what position they'll actually occupy in that society — not their race, sex, class, talents, or even their values. Since nobody knows if they'll end up rich or poor, majority or minority, talented or not, Rawls argues they would rationally design rules that protect against worst-case outcomes rather than gambling on being among the lucky.
From behind the veil, Rawls argues rational people would agree to two principles, in priority order: first, equal basic liberties for everyone, speech, conscience, political participation, that can't be traded away for economic gain; second, the difference principle — social and economic inequalities are only justified if they work to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society. This flips the usual justification for inequality, that it rewards talent or effort, into a stricter test: an unequal arrangement is only fair if it's actually structured to make the worst-off group better off than they'd be under a more equal alternative, not just better off than nothing.
What is Rawls's 'veil of ignorance' thought experiment used to determine?
Read more about the topic
The explanation above is written with AI assistance. These are the originals — go to them to check it.
- Rawls's political philosophy (summary)Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- A Theory of JusticeHarvard University Press
Leviathan
"Without a common power to keep everyone in check, human life would be a war of all against all — so rational self-interested individuals agree to surrender some of their freedom to an absolute sovereign in exchange for security and order, and that agreement, not divine right, is the true basis of political authority."