NationStates Jolt Archive

Here's a thought experiment developed by the late John Rawls, a Political Philosopher (American, I think... it doesn't matter anyway). Some of you may be aware of it, and some may be unaware. In any case, I'd like to see how the group here responds. Here are the rules: you start off from an original position, and you don't know anything about any of the following things: Your race, religion, class, intelligence, talents, physical attributes, values, or anything like that. The premise is that, because these things are random and any one of us might just as easily have been born rich or poor, black or white, we shouldn't know any of these things about ourselves. What you DO know is that you're responsible for your family and your children are going to have to live in the world you leave them with. Based on all this information (or rather the lack thereof), you have to decide what kind of government you want. Remember, your religious and moral values are alien to you. So, wanna play?

Here's a thought experiment developed by the late John Rawls, a Political Philosopher (American, I think... it doesn't matter anyway). Some of you may be aware of it, and some may be unaware. In any case, I'd like to see how the group here responds. Here are the rules: you start off from an original position, and you don't know anything about any of the following things: Your race, religion, class, intelligence, talents, physical attributes, values, or anything like that. The premise is that, because these things are random and any one of us might just as easily have been born rich or poor, black or white, we shouldn't know any of these things about ourselves. What you DO know is that you're responsible for your family and your children are going to have to live in the world you leave them with. Based on all this information (or rather the lack thereof), you have to decide what kind of government you want. Remember, your religious and moral values are alien to you. So, wanna play?

Yeah, I'll play, but I prefer risk and gain to security and anonymity. So I'll choose a governmewnt that provides huge benefits to half the population and enslaves the other half. Sorry John, you built in your presupositions about human nature, and they were wrong.

Yeah, I'll play, but I prefer risk and gain to security and anonymity. So I'll choose a governmewnt that provides huge benefits to half the population and enslaves the other half. Sorry John, you built in your presupositions about human nature, and they were wrong.
Well, 50/50's pretty good chance for you being rich. Would you risk it if it was 15/85?

Are the 85% slaves, or do they have a chance of becoming the rich?

Are the 85% slaves, or do they have a chance of becoming the rich?
85% slaves... I think we would all pick it if 85% got to be rich.

Are the 85% slaves, or do they have a chance of becoming the rich?
85% slaves... I think we would all pick it if 85% got to be rich.

Are the 85% slaves, or do they have a chance of becoming the rich?
85% slaves... I think we would all pick it if 85% got to be rich.

I would choose a system of government where a persons living standards are based entirely on effort. No inheritance, no back-alley business deals, no advantages based on anything more than how much effort you are willing to put into the system.
Also, the government would be entirely neutral in matters of religion and speech, and the press would be free.

Not that this type of government would ever come about, but that's what I would pick.

I would choose a system of government where a persons living standards are based entirely on effort. No inheritance, no back-alley business deals, no advantages based on anything more than how much effort you are willing to put into the system.
Also, the government would be entirely neutral in matters of religion and speech, and the press would be free.

Not that this type of government would ever come about, but that's what I would pick.
Okay, but how, can one judge effort? What if a person puts less effort in and gets the same result due to an inborn talent?

85% slaves... I think we would all pick it if 85% got to be rich.

You misunderstood. Slavery means that you have no chance of changing your status. Your proposal of 15/85 seemed to reflect the rich/others percentages of today. Now the others, the 85% of today, have a chance of becoming rich, so they are not slaves. What I suggested was a different system altogether, more an Indian caste system.

Now if the 85% have a chance of becoming rich, then yes the risk is worthwhile. If not, then no. But you would have to show why it has to be 15/85 not 50/50 to produce an excellent lifestyle for the priveledged.

Ideally a government very much like A Brave New World. Even though you have no choice and people are grown in vats it would be for the good of the species.

if intelligence and values are removed, there's no way to come up with an answer except with a random choice

if intelligence and values are removed, there's no way to come up with an answer except with a random choice

The idea is that you are intelligent and you have your personal values while you are making your choice of society structure. But you do not know what position in that society you will occupy. (The veil of ignorance from John Rawls' "A Theory of Justice", if you want to google it for more detail.)

Anarcho-communism

Ideally a government very much like A Brave New World. Even though you have no choice and people are grown in vats it would be for the good of the species.
the point of that novel was that such a system would destroy people
anyway i think i would choose a government run over the internet so people could only judge you on your opinions not appearance

Hmm, interesting thought experiment.

I must agree with Alien Born's choice on this one.

I'm already poor so I have nothing to lose. I'll play.

I think id pick Logans Run!
I am the Walrus!!!!!!

I am the Walrus!!!!!!

There are people who only know me as Walrus...
not relevant....



So I should contribute to stay on topic-

A society of loosely associated groups that fission off when they get to be signifigantly over 150 people. Each group is ruled collectively to the standards they prefer with only a base set of agreements linking all the groups, such as exchange and passage agreements and recognized soviergnty. No group could hold citizens that didn't want to leave but no group could grow much beyond 150 without having to fission. If you wanted to live in crazy theology land, do it. Crazy pot smokin' hippie land, do it. Ideally.