This is a fairly old concept but I think it deserves some attention given the current climate and the range of issues plaguing the country right now. It was originally used to discuss morality and justice, but I think it can be pretty successfully applied to specific political issues, too. If you want to read it on our actual blog, we'd appreciate it, but the article will be below. Cheers. http://bit.ly/...
Long time, no see, everybody. Tedious studying has proven to be a tough barrier to overcome, but after a recent conversation with GP I decided to carve out some time to write.
Often when the Gnomester and I talk, it ends up being a discussion about how people think and argue instead of an actual issue. This may be because GP is better versed in the technical aspects of issues while I base most of my opinions on general philosophy, requiring me to change the scope of the discussion away from facts in order to compete with him. For whatever reason, we stumbled upon the “Veil of Ignorance” concept introduced by John Harsanyi and popularized (at least in the academic world) by John Rawls. Soon after the concept was brought up, we decided it deserved a blog post.
First, I’ll try to explain it to the best of my knowledge. A few words on the Veil from Rawls himself (by way of Wikipedia) would be an instructive starting point: “ . . . no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status; nor does he know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence and strength, and the like . . . “ In other words, it is a conceptual device that further develops the idea of walking in another person’s shoes. Rawls applied the Veil to issues of justice and morals to arrive at what would be the more “right” conclusion.
A simple and arguably obvious example may better illustrate the contours of the idea. Take slavery as a starting point. Although slavery, or forms of constructive slavery, still exists in the world today, let’s set this argument back before the ratification of the 13th Amendment. If you were to ask a southern plantation owner his thoughts on slavery, he would likely arrive at a far different conclusion than a northern abolitionist based on his own situation. Now, imagine if that same southern plantation owner lost all memory of his life, where he came from, what he owns and even the color of his skin. Then ask his thoughts on slavery. The point is that he would have a much harder time rationalizing slavery if he thought he could be the one trapped in a lifetime of servitude. Worse yet, he wouldn’t know if his children would be born slaves or if he would have any children at all! Therefore, he has to take all those situations into account because they could be his situation. He is simply unaware of it because of the veil. It is from this position that the most logical conclusion will arguably be reached.
Now, even though I think the value of the Veil is clear, it is worth fleshing out why. In the United States, we pride ourselves on freedom and equality. Equality, however, is a moving target. Does it mean the law and policies of the country must be blind to color, creed, and social status? Some would argue that it does. On the contrary, does it mean that the goal is to put everyone on equal footing by taking into account those same individual characteristics? Others would say absolutely. How, then, do we reconcile those two apparently diverging ideas?
I think the most logical way is to remove bias from the equation. Allow yourself to be a third-party observer with no dog in the fight. If one can successfully pull off such a mindset change (or even if they can merely walk through the steps logically), I believe they will have the best chance at arriving at the “correct” conclusion. One would not want their advantages made obsolete should they be fortunate enough to have them. On the other hand, they wouldn’t want to provide no support for those less fortunate because they are just as likely (if not more likely in today’s society) to be in the lower class. This will force compromises. That is the beauty of the Veil. It is not to provide a good argument on one side or the other, but rather to marry ideas together that have valid points but are too shortsighted.
I was going to attempt to apply the Veil to one of the issues the country and the world face today, but I see I have already exploded my word count and probably lost many of you along the way. Perhaps, if there is a positive reaction or interest shown (or if I just need another reason to procrastinate from studying), I will start taking issues through the concept periodically.
I’ll end by saying that I don’t believe it is easy or even realistic for society to reason under the Veil of Ignorance. I do, however, think it is incredibly valuable for individuals to try it on for size and put their own beliefs through the analysis. Keep an open mind to what conclusions you might draw. You may think this is just another way of saying “look at it from their point of view.” But that isn’t what it is asking you to do. Instead, look at it from no one’s point of view.
*Disclaimer: My apologies to Rawls, Harsanyi, and any other philosophical titan I may have misinterpreted while playing weekend philosopher.
GP is the real brains, so if you want to read his stuff, check out: http://bit.ly/...