Abstract
In his writings on justice, John Rawls notably introduced an initial testing procedure he dubbed the original position. It describes a hypothetical situation in which several rational, self-interested agents are placed behind a so called veil of ignorance and asked to make a definitive decision on what type of society they would live in. Rawls argues that the rational agents in the original position would choose according to a maximin decision strategy; that is, they would choose to maximize the worst possible payoff. He backs this by arguing that the situation itself drives the agents to act as risk-averse decision makers, as this is no regular everyday decision, but one which will affect all of their future life and all their future decisions. Notably, contra Rawls, John Harsanyi argues that, while some degree of riskaversion within the original position is rationally sustainable by the uniqueness of the situation and the weight of the decision, Rawlsian agents are characterized by an extreme, highly irrational risk-aversion in choosing the maximin strategy. That is
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
