buinesss

Rawls argues that we should decide the terms of distributive justice behind what he calls a "veil of ignorance" so as not to advantage our own position. Thus, if we carried out his thought experiment, we would not neglect the interests of disadvantaged minorities (as utilitarians might) since we would be acknowledging the possibility that we ourselves might be among them. In such a frame of mind, we would tend to support basic social services including minimum wages and public education etc. to make sure that the least advantaged members of society would be maximally benefitted. Do you agree that this is a good way to define distributive justice? Also, do you think it is really possible for each of us to imagine ourselves in very different socio-economic positions than we already have? Justify your answer.