113. The Main Idea of the Theory&pawnis]identifiedmethode-I¥fYEny-ogg.Y.FI-]***societiesD-]***min.IYE.tn
choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulateall subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. Then, having chosen aconception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitu-tion and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with theprinciples of justice initially agreed upon. Our social situation is just if itis such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we would havecontracted into the general system of rules which defines it. Moreover,assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles (thatis, that a particular conception of justice would be chosen), it will then betrue that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles those en-gaged in them can say to one another that they are cooperating on termsto which they would agree if they were free and equal persons whoserelations with respect to one another were fair. They could all view theirarrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledgein an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable con-straints on the choice of principles. The general recognition of this factwould provide the basis for a public acceptance of the correspondingprinciples of justice. No society can, of course, be a scheme of coopera-tion which men enter voluntarily in a literal sense; each person findshimself placed at birth in some particular position in some particularsociety, and the nature of this position materially affects his life pros-pects. Yet a society satisfying the principles of justice as fairness comesas close as a society can to being a voluntary scheme, for it meets theprinciples which free and equal persons would assent to under circum-stances that are fair. In this sense its members are autonomous and theobligations they recognize self-imposed.One feature of justice as fairness is to think of the parties in the initialsituation as rational and mutually disinterested. This does not mean thatthe parties are egoists, that is, individuals with only certain kinds ofinterests, say in wealth, prestige, and domination. But they are conceivedas not taking an interest in one another’s interests. They are to presumethat even their spiritual aims may be opposed, in the way that the aims ofthose of different religions may be opposed. Moreover, the concept ofrationality must be interpreted as far as possible in the narrow sense,standard in economic theory, of taking the most effective means to givenends. I shall modify this concept to some extent, as explained later (§25),but one must try to avoid introducing into it any controversial ethicalelements. The initial situation must be characterized by stipulations thatare widely accepted.
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
End of preview. Want to read all 17 pages?
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
