>HOME

Veil of Ignoranceb–³’m‚̃”ƒFƒCƒ‹


Tweet


Ÿhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance

ŸTateiwa, Shinya(—§Šâ ^–ç)@2016@On Private Property, English Version, Kyoto Books

Ÿ—§Šâ ^–ç@2013/05/20@wŽ„“IŠ—L˜_ ‘æ‚Q”ŁxC¶Šˆ‘‰@E•¶ŒÉ”ŁC973p.@ISBN-10: 4865000062@ISBN-13: 978-4865000061@1800+@mamazonn^mkinokuniyan@¦

Ÿ—§Šâ ^–ç@1997/09/05@wŽ„“IŠ—L˜_xC™¤‘‘–[C445+66p.@ISBN-10: 4326601175@ISBN-13: 978-4326601172@6300@mamazonn^mkinokuniyan@¦

7.2 Solidarity Brought about by What is Unknowable
@7.2.1 Corrections Based on the Principle of Insurance

@"Logic of the same kind can be seen in the approach put forward by John Rawls im19711979nm1979nj. His arguments are very complex and their fundamental "principles" are not the same as those laid out above, but it is certainly possible to adopt his conclusion that, being shrouded in a "veil of ignorance" and unable to know our own (future) circumstances, an acceptable distribution of resources should be arrived at by imagining ourselves in the weakest position within the system in question10. This idea is not limited to Rawls. The same sort of logic is generally found in arguments that lead from the private interests of individuals towards "co-operation", "reciprocal assistance" and "collective liability.""
In practice, of course, we do in fact know ourselves (to a certain extent), and as a result it has often been pointed out that Rawls' assumption of a "veil of ignorance" is perhaps a bit unnatural. But at the same time it is not as though this kind of ignorance has nothing to do with our actual circumstances and experience of reality. While we may have some degree of understanding of our current situation, we do not know (at least with any certainty) what will happen in the future, and as a result this argument is therefore quite persuasive. That is why these sorts of arguments have in fact spread so widely throughout the world - it is not, of course, because everyone has read Rawls' great works of philosophy11.

  • Rawls [1971] asserts that "freedom" is what follows from the "original position" he posits. But it is not necessary or inevitable that freedom be given priority and chosen over other options in the original position. Hart [1983] makes this point whens asserting that Rawls makes certain assumptions about humanity. This is a valid criticism. On freedom in Rawls' writings, see Paul [1984]; on the "veil of ignorance," see Inoue [1986:136,222-223], Kukathas and Pettit [1990] and Sasazawa [1993:202ff].
    There are other understandings of this issue in addition to those noted in the main text. Iwata states, "The understanding that human beings being born with various natural differences is something that is 'contingent' appears, at least in Rawls' writings, to be a statement of fact but is actually an ethical judgement.... In other words, whether an individual takes the abilities they are born with for granted as obvious or inevitable facts or instead views them as things that are not inevitable (or to put it another way, as things that are not caused by anything within themselves and that cannot be taken for granted) is something that is determined not simply by facts on the ground but rather by that individual's outlook on life," and sees the view of "contingencies" as "occurrences completely without reason..., and consequently not occurrences deserved by the self" as the core of Rawls' thought (see Iwata [1994:37-38]).
    For more on Rawls' thought, see also Kawamoto [1995].

  • This is pointed out in Tateiwa [1995a:230-231]. For example, there are innumerable instances of the use of this kind of language in connection with "social welfare." This language is commonly used because it does indeed appeal to us. The problem is that there are points of which we are not sufficiently aware regarding the question of what arises when these assertions are used as the basis of justification - I discuss this below.

  • ŸTateiwa, Shinya(—§Šâ ^–ç 2004a Equality of Freedom: An Another Simple World (wŽ©—R‚Ì•½“™\\ŠÈ’P‚Å•Ê‚ÈŽp‚̐¢ŠEx), Iwanami Shoten (Šâ”g‘“X), 349+41p. <118,123,124,614,726,773,784,786,791,792,794>
    ž—§Šâ ^–ç@2004/01/14@wŽ©—R‚Ì•½“™\\ŠÈ’P‚Å•Ê‚ÈŽp‚̐¢ŠExCŠâ”g‘“XC349+41p.@ISBN:4000233874@3255@mamazonn^mkinokuniyan@¦

    ŸTateiwa, Shinya(—§Šâ ^–ç)@2016@On Private Property, English Version, Kyoto Books


    REV:20160531
    žDistributive Justiceb•ª”z“I³‹`@ ž¶‘¶E¶Šˆ@
    TOP@HOME (http://www.arsvi.com)ž