John Rawls Veil Of Ignorance

Human beings are primordially attracted to the most unethical and heinous acts that our species commits- war, murder, rape, theft, kidnapping, and other acts of violence permeate society to the core. This is evidenced in today’s popular music, movies, television, games, and, perhaps, most significantly in the media. At the same time, though, people, in general, don’t commit such heinous acts that societies across the world condemn as unethical and immoral almost unanimously, as if they did, society, itself would have no order and would therefore collapse. So why, then, are these acts the ones most closely followed and well-known, leading to the common media refrain, “if it bleeds, it leads?” To deal with such quandaries, social contracts

Under this model, one would be put behind a veil, or as Rawls says, in the “original position,” where he or she would be unable to see the circumstance under which he or she might be born. As a result, Rawls argues, as one would be unable to know if he or she might be born rich or poor, male or female, Latin or Asian (or another race), gay or straight, and so on and so forth, under this model one could only come to the conclusion that the most ethical and just world would be one in which everyone had equal rights, equal treatment, equal protection, equal representation in government, and of course, equal treatment under the law. The veil of ignorance fails, though, in that it presupposes that the participants in that thought experiment would be in support of the social contract, and fails to take into account Brock Turner and others who would not support the social contract, or would at least want to narrow its size and scope, as evidenced by their breaking it. While such an individual could still desire equal rights, equal representation, etc., this desire could manifest in such conditions being met not by a social contract that guarantees equal treatment, but by the lack of a social contract to give bias or enforce any ethical standard. It follows that if one doesn’t believe in the goals if the social contract, if one is placed behind the theoretical veil of ignorance, that one would design a minimalistic social contract, which would fail to address and account for the violent tendencies of human