Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    No party behind the veil of ignorance can press for princ... — Carmelics
    Home/Democracy & Governance
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    No party behind the veil of ignorance can press for principles that arbitrarily favor the particular citizen they represent.

    Democracy & GovernanceSocial Contract
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • No party knows the specific attributes of the citizen they represent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Parties behind the veil retain knowledge of general facts about human psychology, including risk-aversion, which systematically favors certain life-plan structures over others.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Maximin reasoning, which Rawls endorses for the original position, itself encodes a particular attitude toward risk that arbitrarily privileges the worst-off over other distributions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.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.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The selection of which contingencies to exclude behind the veil is itself a normative choice that embeds substantive liberal values prior to any agreement, undermining the claim of procedural neutrality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Democracy & GovernanceSocial Contract

    Related

    Harsanyi demonstrated that rational agents under genuine ignorance should maximi...Maximin reasoning, which Rawls endorses for the original position, itself encode...No party knows the specific attributes of the citizen they represent.Parties behind the veil retain knowledge of general facts about human psychology...
    +1 moreShow less
    The selection of which contingencies to exclude behind the veil is itself a norm...

    Similar

    No party can press for agreement on principles that will arbitrarily f...89%No party knows the specific attributes of the citizen they represent.80%The agreement reached by the parties behind the veil of ignorance will...79%The veil of ignorance situates the representatives of free and equal c...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: rawls
    View source passageHide passage
    The veil of ignorance situates the representatives of free and equal citizens fairly with respect to one another. No party can press for agreement on principles that will arbitrarily favor the particular citizen they represent, because no party knows the specific attributes of the citizen they represent. The situation of the parties thus embodies reasonable conditions, within which the parties can make a rational agreement. Each party tries to agree to principles that will be best for the citize
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit