John Rawls
What principles of justice would rational people choose if they didn't know their place in society?
John Rawls is the most influential political philosopher of the twentieth century. His 1971 masterwork A Theory of Justice proposed a contractualist method for deriving principles of justice: imagine choosing the basic structure of society from behind a 'veil of ignorance' — without knowing your race, sex, class, natural talents, or conception of the good. Rawls argued that from this 'original position,' rational persons would choose two principles: first, equal basic liberties for all; second, social and economic inequalities are acceptable only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society (the difference principle) and are attached to positions open to all.
Rawls's method — called 'justice as fairness' — is both a thought experiment and a substantive theory. It offers a way to bracket self-interest when thinking about social arrangements, forcing you to ask: would I accept this if I might be the person most disadvantaged by it? The veil of ignorance has become one of the most widely used tools in applied ethics, policy analysis, and everyday moral reasoning.
In his later work Political Liberalism (1993), Rawls retreated from comprehensive moral theory toward a narrower 'political' conception — arguing that principles of justice must be justifiable to citizens holding a wide range of reasonable comprehensive doctrines (religious, philosophical, etc.). He coined 'public reason' as the standard for political argument: in a pluralist democracy, we should justify our political positions in terms others can accept regardless of their deepest beliefs.
Historical Context
Rawls was writing in the aftermath of World War II and during the American civil rights movement. A Theory of Justice was explicitly a response to utilitarianism's dominance in political philosophy — Rawls argued that utility maximization could justify trampling individual rights and that a fair theory of justice was needed. His work launched decades of debate in political philosophy, including libertarian responses from Nozick and communitarian critiques from Sandel and MacIntyre.
Key Ideas
- Veil of ignorance — choose social principles without knowing your place in society
- Original position — the hypothetical standpoint of rational choice under ignorance
- The difference principle — inequalities are just only if they benefit the least advantaged
- Priority of basic liberties — equal rights come before maximizing welfare
- Justice as fairness — the goal of social cooperation is fair terms all could accept
- Public reason — political justifications should appeal to shared standards, not sectarian doctrines
Core Concepts
A thought experiment: choose principles of justice without knowing your race, sex, class, natural abilities, or conception of the good. Forces impartiality by removing self-interest.
The hypothetical initial situation from which rational agents choose principles of justice under the veil of ignorance.
Social and economic inequalities are justified only if they improve the position of the least advantaged members of society.
Things that rational persons want whatever else they want — rights, liberties, opportunities, income, wealth, and the social bases of self-respect.
The method of moving back and forth between moral intuitions and principles, adjusting each in light of the other, until they cohere.
The requirement that in a pluralist democracy, political justifications draw on principles and values that citizens can accept regardless of their comprehensive doctrines.
Key Texts
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (1971)
- John Rawls, Political Liberalism (1993)
- John Rawls, The Law of Peoples (1999)
- John Rawls, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (2001)
Where This Shows Up in Frameworks
Why This Shows Up in Frameworks
When a framework asks 'would I accept this if I might be the person worst off?' or insists that basic rights cannot be traded away for aggregate gains, Rawls is directly present. The veil of ignorance is one of the most useful tools in everyday ethical reasoning.