Harsanyi demonstrated that rational agents under genuine ignorance should maximize expected utility, not adopt maximin, making the veil's output indeterminate without smuggled-in assumptions.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1.Expected utility theory is the normative standard for rational decision-making under uncertainty across economics and decision theory.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Rawls's veil of ignorance lacks specification of probability distributions, making maximin an unjustified choice among many possible principles.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Harsanyi's aggregation theorem shows that impartial preferences under uncertainty mathematically yield utilitarian conclusions, not egalitarian ones.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

1.The veil of ignorance is a thought experiment about fairness, not a decision-theoretic setup requiring expected utility calculations.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Maximin is defensible as a rational principle when stakes are catastrophic and probabilities are genuinely unknown, not just when smuggling assumptions.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Harsanyi's assumptions (cardinal utility, neutrality axiom) are themselves substantive moral commitments that beg questions against Rawls.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Key Terms

Genuine ignorance(as the condition for applying decision theory): Real, complete lack of knowledge about something—not just pretending you don't know, but actually having no information about it.
Harsanyi(game theory and decision-making under uncertainty): John Harsanyi was a Hungarian-American economist and philosopher who developed a mathematical framework for understanding how people make decisions when they don't have complete information about others' beliefs or preferences.
Indeterminate(Reichenbach's three-valued quantum logic): The value of propositions that quantum theory implies cannot be assessed to be either true or false
Smuggled-in assumptions(as the hidden factors that the veil requires): Hidden or unstated beliefs that sneak into an argument without being acknowledged; ideas you slip in the back door instead of justifying them openly.
The veil (veil of ignorance)(as the framework being evaluated): A thought experiment where you imagine making decisions about society's rules without knowing what job, race, wealth, or social position you'd have in that society; the idea is to make fair rules since you won't know if you'll be rich or poor.
expected utility(Cited as a domain where aggregated probabilities play a key role): A calculation that aggregates probability-weighted outcomes to determine the overall value of a decision
maximin(Social choice theory and distributive justice): A rule that rank-orders social alternatives solely in terms of the welfare level of the worst-off individual
rational agents(Reid's account of autonomous action): Beings who can gain critical distance from mechanical and animal incentives and regulate their conduct by appeal to rational principles of action.

Connections

2 topics

Social Contract1 linked Democracy & Governance1 linked

Expected utility theory is the normative standard for rational decision-making u...Harsanyi's aggregation theorem shows that impartial preferences under uncertaint...

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 2 (1 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit