“Veil of Ignorance”
Rawls elaborates, “If a man knew that he was wealthy, he might find it rational to advance the principle that various taxes for welfare measures be counted unjust; if he knew that he was poor he would most likely propose the contrary principle…One exudes the knowledge of those contingencies which sets men at odds and allows them to be guided by their prejudices. In this manner the veil of ignorance is arrived at in a natural way.”
Arguments regarding ‘principles of justice” are dependent on subjective circumstances. Subjectivity hinders people from considering other’s circumstances when arguing for or against various measures. One person may consider a measure unfair, whereas another will deem it fair; it all depends on their viewpoints. The ‘veil of ignorance’ can be overcome through objective and rational thinking.
“Net balance of satisfaction”
Rawls writes, “And so by these reflections one reaches the principle of utility in a natural way: a society is properly arranged when its institutions maximize the net balance of satisfaction… Social justice is the principle or rational prudence applied to an aggregative conception of the welfare of the group.” Rawls uses ‘net balance of satisfaction’ to underscore the essence of social justice which is to ensure that the overall welfare of community members is maximized. Institutions in charge of social justice ought to focus on the societal welfare rather than the individuals’ needs.
“Abstract Object”
Rawl elaborates, “An institution may be thought of in two ways: first as an abstract object, that is, as a possible form of conduct expressed by a system to rules; and second, as the realization in the thought of certain persons at a certain time and place of the actions specified by these rules.” Institutions that take the form of ‘abstract objects’ do not require people or structures to run. Abstract institutions operate based on laws that are understood by all stakeholders. Such institutions are invisible.
Discard
Rawls remarks, “Thus in deciding which of our judgements to take into account we may reasonably select some and exclude others. For example, we can discard those judgments made with hesitation, or in which we have little confidence.” The metaphorical discarding refers to the abandonment of judgements that are deemed inappropriate. Once the judgments are discarded, they can no longer be applied.
Regularity
Rawls insists, “Formal justice or justice as regularity excludes significant kinds of injustices. For if it is supposed that the authorities should be impartial and not influenced by personal, monetary, or other irrelevant considerations in their handling of particular cases.” Justice is ordinary expected to prevent unfairness in society. Principles should be regularly applied to guarantee people all the justice that they merit. The use of laws to perpetuate injustice is an irregularity.
