What is John Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance?

It is impossible to delve into the political philosophy of the 20th century without taking into account the work of John Rawls. For many, his theoretical proposal reactivated reflection on justice in society, while others consider it excessively idealistic. However, it is difficult to remain indifferent to his work, especially in the face of one of the most fundamental ideas: the veil of ignorance.

It is a conceptual tool that helps eliminate partiality and bias from political decisions. And, although Rawls’ influence was profound in philosophy, his ideas also have weight in economists, political scientists, and sociologists; They are often used as an argumentative basis for making political decisions.

Most of his philosophical development is found in his work Theory of Justicewhere an attempt is made to design the principles that every fair institution should follow, regarding the distribution of duties and fundamental rights, as referred to in an article of the Magazine of International Relations, Strategy and Security.

Rawls and contractualism

Rawls’s perspective is based on the contractualist tradition, which maintains that the norms and principles that govern life in society result from a fair and equitable agreement among all members of said society. Some of the most relevant thinkers in this tradition are Locke, Rousseau and Kant. For his part, Rawls attempts to take the contractualist view to a higher level of abstraction.

For him, society is a “cooperative enterprise”, that is, a group of people who associate to pursue common objectives. Although the majority accepts and recognizes certain mandatory rules of conduct, conflicts of interest are inevitable. That is why it is necessary to work on the design of principles of justice that guarantee equity.

Rawls suggests that when making decisions it is necessary to be shielded from information about one’s own identity.

What is John Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance?

When individuals make decisions about the principles that should govern society, they tend to seek the benefit of their interests. Suppose someone will choose how resources will be distributed in a society; If he were a farmer, he would seek greater investments for the agricultural sector. On the other hand, a scientist will tend to have certain research projects funded.

The veil of ignorance is a metaphor used to represent the idea that, when making decisions about the norms and principles that govern society, Individuals must be shielded from information about their identity.

For Rawls, people in a just society should decide without the influence of certain characteristics on their determinations. These particularities are the following:

Their ethnicity. Their gender. Their social position. Their level of wealth. Their sexual orientation.

How does the veil of ignorance work?

According to Rawls, Those principles of justice selected by rational, free and equal people have universal validity. To guarantee the impartiality of such decisions, it is necessary to design a procedure that ensures objective results.

For it, The philosopher proposes to place oneself in what he calls the “original position”, That is to say, an ahistorical moment, a hypothetical situation from which individuals opt for different principles that will direct the institutions.

This proposal replaces the traditional notion of social contract. It is an agreement in which people can promote their own ends on an equal footing. In the “original position”, the veil forces decisions to be made for the benefit of any social sector.

In this way, it would be possible to achieve what Rawls calls “reflective equilibrium”, where the decisions made by all those involved would result in impartial norms. This balance, reviews a text in the Stadford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Archiveis the last phase of the deliberative process.

What principles would people choose according to Rawls?

Once stripped of all their circumstantial qualities, their social positions and personal interests, individuals choose certain principles that will govern the institutions. It is not enough for such principles to be operational and efficient, they must necessarily be fair.

According to Rawls, utilitarianism, that is, a principle that maximizes the sum total of individual satisfactions, would be rejected, since this does not consider the distinction between people. On the other hand, there are two foundations that would favor everyone impartially, regardless of the social position they occupy; These are the following:

Principle of freedom: determines that everyone has equality in their basic freedoms.Difference principle: It establishes that inequalities in social goods and opportunities can only be accepted if they benefit the least advantaged in society.

In this way, Rawls guarantees that the goods in a society will be distributed to everyone equally. If there is an improvement in the situation of the most advantaged, this can only be tolerated if it contributes to the least advantaged.

For example, in state of affairs ‘X’ person ‘A’ has 10 units of resources and person ‘B’ has five units of the same resource. If we were to move to a state of affairs ‘Y’, where person ‘A’ owns 15 units, person ‘B’ would have to own at least 6 units to satisfy the ‘difference principle’.

The veil of ignorance is linked to the reflective balance that results from a deliberative process.

Difficulties of the veil of ignorance

The veil of ignorance seeks to ensure that everyone is treated fairly and impartially. By ignoring social differences, equity is promoted, cooperation is improved, and all types of personal biases or selfish interests in decision-making are eliminated.

However, some criticize Rawls’ theory because they assume that it is impossible to completely ignore differences in personal aspects. Putting ourselves in a situation where our social position, age, gender or innate abilities do not count in decision making seems difficult to achieve. This makes the theory look too idealistic and impractical.

Despite the difficulties in implementing the veil, Rawls’s precepts have an undeniable influence on the political philosophy of the last century and the present. Many thinkers continue to take the scenario of the original position as a basis to develop objective procedures. What do you think? Would you make fair decisions behind a veil of ignorance?

You might be interested…