more on this theme     |     more from this text

Single Idea 20595

[filed under theme 24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 4. Original Position / b. Veil of ignorance ]

Full Idea

Walzer says behind the veil of ignorance there would be no way to know how a particular good should be distributed, because we would not know the social meaning of the good in question.

Gist of Idea

You can't distribute goods from behind a veil, because their social meaning is unclear

Source

report of Michael Walzer (Spheres of Justice [1983]) by Tuckness,A/Wolf,C - This is Political Philosophy 4 'Communitarian'

Book Ref

Tuckness,A / Wolf,C: 'This is Political Philosophy' [Wiley Blackwell 2017], p.97

A Reaction

Is Rawls actually proposing to decide details of distribution from behind the veil? There is just the maximin principle. What that means in practice would surely come once the society was under way.

The 28 ideas from Michael Walzer

23564 Deep ethical theory is very controversial, but we have to live with higher ethical practice [Walzer]
23593 Jus ad bellum and Jus in bello are independent; unjust wars can be fought in a just way [Walzer]
23568 If whole states possess rights, there can be social relations between states [Walzer]
23567 Even non-violent intrusive acts between states count as aggression, if they justify resistance [Walzer]
23570 The only good reason for fighting is in defence of rights [Walzer]
23571 States can rightly pre-empt real and serious threats [Walzer]
23572 Just wars are self-defence, or a rightful intercession in another's troubles [Walzer]
23573 For moral reasons, a just war must be a limited war [Walzer]
23577 Napoleon said 'I don't care about the deaths of a million men' [Walzer]
23574 The duties and moral status of loyal and obedient soldiers is the same in defence and aggression [Walzer]
23575 We can't blame soldiers for anything they do which clearly promotes victory [Walzer]
23614 Even aggressor soldiers are not criminals, so they have equal rights with their opponents [Walzer]
23578 Double Effect needs a double intention - to achieve the good, and minimise the evil [Walzer]
23579 Soldiers will only protect civilians if they feel safe from them [Walzer]
23580 States need not endure attacks passively, and successful reprisals are legitimate [Walzer]
23581 The aim of reprisals is to enforce the rules of war [Walzer]
23582 Reprisal is defensible, as an alternative to war [Walzer]
23584 Rejecting Combatant Equality allows just soldiers to be harsher, even to the extreme [Walzer]
23586 What matters in war is unacceptable targets, not unacceptable weapons [Walzer]
23588 With nuclear weapons we have a permanent supreme emergency (which is unstable) [Walzer]
23587 Nuclear bombs are not for normal war; they undermine the 'just war', with a new morality [Walzer]
23589 Kidnapped sailors and volunteers have different obligations to the passengers [Walzer]
23590 Criminal responsibility can be fully assigned to each member of a group [Walzer]
23592 We can only lead war towards peace if we firmly enforce the rules of war [Walzer]
23591 If the oppressor is cruel, nonviolence is either surrender, or a mere gesture [Walzer]
20595 You can't distribute goods from behind a veil, because their social meaning is unclear [Walzer, by Tuckness/Wolf]
20592 Complex equality restricts equalities from spilling over, like money influencing politics and law [Walzer, by Tuckness/Wolf]
20549 Equality is complex, with different spheres of equality where different principles apply [Walzer, by Swift]