Comprehension

My aim is to present a conception of justice which generalizes and carries to a higher level of abstraction the familiar theory of the social contract. In order to do this we are not to think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a particular form of government. Rather, the idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality. These principles are to regulate all further agreements; they specify the kinds of social cooperation that can be entered into and the forms of government that can be established. This way of regarding the principles of justice, I shall call justice as fairness. Thus, we are to imagine that those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social benefits. Just as each person must decide by rational reflection what constitutes his good, that is, the system of ends which it is rational for him to pursue, so a group of persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust. The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty determines the principles of justice.
In justice as fairness, the original position is not an actual historical state of affairs. It is understood as a purely hypothetical situation characterized so as to lead to a certain conception of justice. Among the essential features of this situation is that no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like. I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. This ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances. Since all are similarly situated and no one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain.
Justice as fairness begins with one of the most general of all choices which persons might make together, namely, with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. Then, having chosen a conception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitution and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially agreed upon. Our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements, we would have contracted into the general system of rules which defines it. Moreover, assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles, it will then be true that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles, those engaged in them can say to one another that they are cooperating on terms to which they would agree if they were free and equal persons whose relations with respect to one another were fair. They could all view their arrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledge in an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable constraints on the choice of principles. The general recognition of this fact would provide the basis for a public acceptance of the corresponding principles of justice. No society can, of course, be a scheme of cooperation which men enter voluntarily in a literal sense; each person finds himself placed at birth in some particular position in some particular society, and the nature of this position materially affects his life prospects. Yet a society satisfying the principles of justice as fairness comes as close as a society can to being a voluntary scheme, for it meets the principles which free and equal persons would assent to under circumstances that are fair

Question: 1

A just society, as conceptualized in the passage, can be best described as:

Show Hint

When a passage describes a hypothetical model, the Correct Answer often combines the imagined nature of the model with its defining fairness criteria.
Updated On: Jul 31, 2025
  • A Utopia in which everyone is equal and no one enjoys any privilege based on their existing positions and powers.
  • A hypothetical society in which people agree upon principles of justice which are fair.
  • A society in which principles of justice are not based on the existing positions and powers of the individuals.
  • A society in which principles of justice are fair to all.
  • A hypothetical society in which principles of justice are not based on the existing positions and powers of the individuals.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is

Solution and Explanation

The passage describes “justice as fairness” as originating from a purely hypothetical ‘original position’ where no one knows their place in society, class, abilities, or personal advantages. This “veil of ignorance” ensures that principles are chosen without bias towards any existing positions or powers. Thus, a just society here is not an actual utopia, but a theoretical construct in which justice is determined under conditions of equality and impartiality. - Option (1) incorrectly frames it as an actual utopia rather than a hypothetical construct.
- Option (2) is partly correct but too general — it lacks the defining feature of ignoring existing positions.
- Option (3) and (4) are valid but omit the “hypothetical” aspect central to the concept.
- Option (5) captures both the hypothetical nature and the exclusion of existing positions/powers, aligning exactly with the passage.
\[ \boxed{\text{Option (5)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

The original agreement or original position in the passage has been used by the author as:

Show Hint

In philosophical reasoning, “original position” often refers to an impartial decision-making scenario designed to remove bias.
Updated On: Jul 31, 2025
  • A hypothetical situation conceived to derive principles of justice which are not influenced by position, status and condition of individuals in the society.
  • A hypothetical situation in which every individual is equal and no individual enjoys any privilege based on the existing positions and powers.
  • A hypothetical situation to ensure fairness of agreements among individuals in society.
  • An imagined situation in which principles of justice would have to be fair.
  • An imagined situation in which fairness is the objective of the principles of justice to ensure that no individual enjoys any privilege based on the existing positions and powers.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

The passage describes the “original position” as a purely hypothetical situation, where principles of justice are chosen behind a “veil of ignorance” — meaning no one knows their social status, abilities, or circumstances. This ensures that the principles are free from bias or advantage based on existing positions and conditions. Option (1) encapsulates this most accurately. \[ \boxed{\text{Option (1)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

Which of the following best illustrates the situation that is equivalent to choosing ‘the principles of justice’ behind a ‘veil of ignorance’?

Show Hint

When identifying the “veil of ignorance” analogy, look for scenarios where decision-makers lack knowledge of their own specific circumstances.
Updated On: Jul 31, 2025
  • The principles of justice are chosen by businessmen, who are marooned on an uninhabited island after a shipwreck, but have some possibility of returning.
  • The principles of justice are chosen by a group of school children whose capabilities are yet to develop.
  • The principles of justice are chosen by businessmen, who are marooned on an uninhabited island after a shipwreck and have no possibility of returning.
  • The principles of justice are chosen assuming that such principles will govern the lives of the rule makers only in their next birth if the rule makers agree that they will be born again.
  • The principles of justice are chosen by potential immigrants who are unaware of the resources necessary to succeed in a foreign country.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is

Solution and Explanation

The “veil of ignorance” concept ensures decision-makers don’t know their future position, resources, or abilities, removing bias. Option (5) mirrors this by describing people making choices without knowledge of the advantages or disadvantages they might face in the new country — aligning with the impartiality of the original position. \[ \boxed{\text{Option (5)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4

Why, according to the passage, do principles of justice need to be based on an original agreement?

Show Hint

In questions about fairness in law or governance, focus on the conditions for legitimacy stated in the passage.
Updated On: Jul 31, 2025
  • Social institutions and laws can be considered fair only if they conform to principles of justice.
  • Social institutions and laws can be fair only if they are consistent with the principles of justice as initially agreed upon.
  • Social institutions and laws need to be fair in order to be just.
  • Social institutions and laws evolve fairly only if they are consistent with the principles of justice as initially agreed upon.
  • Social institutions and laws conform to the principles of justice as initially agreed upon.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

The passage emphasizes that social institutions and laws derive legitimacy and fairness from being aligned with the principles agreed upon in the original position. Option (2) captures this dependency — fairness is judged based on conformity to the initial agreement. \[ \boxed{\text{Option (2)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5

Which of the following situations best represents the idea of justice as fairness, as argued in the passage?

Show Hint

Justice as fairness focuses on ensuring equal opportunity rather than enforcing identical outcomes.
Updated On: Jul 31, 2025
  • All individuals are paid equally for the work they do.
  • Everyone is assigned some work for his or her livelihood.
  • All acts of theft are penalized equally.
  • All children are provided free education in similar schools.
  • All individuals are provided a fixed sum of money to take care of their health.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

Justice as fairness is about ensuring equality of opportunity and removing advantages based on arbitrary factors like birth circumstances. Providing all children with free education in similar schools promotes equal opportunities regardless of social background, fitting the “veil of ignorance” principle. \[ \boxed{\text{Option (4)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension

View More Questions

Questions Asked in CAT exam

View More Questions