Hello, my name is Luvell Anderson,

and I am an assistant[br]professor of philosophy

at the University of Memphis.

Today, I'm going to talk a little about

an idea called "The Original Position."

How would you set up a[br]society that is just?

Justice is an important idea we use

to evaluate our social and[br]political institutions.

Things like our courts, government,

educational, and economic systems.

As we can see from the strong reactions

of those who feel like they[br]have been treated unjustly,

having just social and[br]political institutions

is essential for having[br]a peaceful society.

For example, African Americans[br]have held marches,

endured fire hoses and death,[br]throughout various periods

in U.S. history in the name of justice.

Also, Tibetan monks have[br]set themselves on fire

in protest of what they view as unjust

or oppressive Chinese policies.

So as we can see, justice[br]is an important idea.

Before we discuss possible ways[br]of creating a just society,

we should first have an[br]idea about what it means

for a society to be just.

Discussions about the concept of justice

go back a long time.

The ancient Greek philosopher[br]Plato, for example,

described justice as an[br]internal harmony, that is,

the parts of some thing, say[br]an individual or a society,

being ordered in the right way.

For others, justice is importantly tied

to notions like equality.

For example, Aristotle says[br]that justice is the equal.

And others have tied justice[br]to the idea of dessert,

or what someone deserves.

The notion of justice[br]that we will focus on

thinks of justice in terms of fairness.

The famous political[br]philosopher John Rawls

came up with a way of[br]developing principles of justice

that distributes benefits and burdens

associated with our social[br]and political practices

in a way that is fair to all parties.

Rawls introduces a thought experiment.

A thought experiment is a device

that engages our imagination to help us

think about the nature of things.

So in this thought experiment,

Rawls imagines free,[br]mutually disinterested,

and rational persons who sit down

and devise principles of justice

in an initial situation that[br]is structured to be fair

to all the parties involved.

He calls this initial situation

"The Original Position."

Now, what makes the situation fair

has to do with the kind of considerations

the representatives in[br]this original position

can bring to bear when reasoning about

the principles of justice.

For instance, no one can[br]tailor principles selfishly

to favor her particular condition.

Also, Rawls does not allow things like

natural fortune or social circumstances

to be acceptable bases for advantaging

or disadvantaging persons.

A unique feature of[br]Rawls' original position

is what we might refer to[br]as the epistemic constraints

on the persons in the situation.

The word "epistemic" here simply refers

to the kinds of things a person can know.

In the original position, the persons,

or let's call them "agents,"

they know nothing about themselves

or their position in society.

They do not know their race, age, gender,

their strength,[br]intelligence or psychology,

talents, handicaps, or social standing.

Nor do they know theirs views about

what they find valuable[br]or important in life.

Rawls refers to this condition as being

under the veil of ignorance.

Of course, agents in the original position

aren't completely without knowledge.

They know the kinds of[br]facts that are given to us

by natural sciences like biology,

and social sciences like psychology.

Rawls believes that the[br]principles of justice

the agents construct in[br]the original position,

under the veil of ignorance,[br]will be fair simply

because the situation[br]itself is set up fairly.

Now I mentioned earlier that the agents

in the original position[br]are mutually disinterested

and rational.

I should probably take a[br]moment to say a little more

about what that means.

The agents are mutually disinterested

in that they are only concerned

to advance their own interests.

Agents in the original[br]position will not be moved

to sacrifice their own interests

for the sake of advantaging someone else,

nor will they try to disadvantage others

due to envy or hatred.

And the agents' decisions[br]in the original position

are rational, in that they[br]use the most effective means

to achieve their goals.

To wrap up:

the original position is a fair situation

where agents who know nothing[br]in particular about themselves,

but know only general facts, agree upon

principles of justice[br]that we use to decide

how to set up a just society.

Subtitles by the Amara.org community