John Rawls' Theory of Justice reframed

[TheVat]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/opin ... rawls.html

Considers Rawls' concept in the context of current events...and reincarnation. A really interesting look at the current excesses of self-interest and capitalism.

[-1-]

The comments were more interesting read than the article.

My take: reincarnation, the basic tenet of vail of ignorance, is timeless. The "other world" where we exist -- according ot some teaching -- between incarnation, is outside of time.

So what if this whole reincarnation game is played backward in time? the dead me getting born and dying again BEFORE my present existence?

Then the whole game turns upside down, and the more we live it up, the more the "future" me has access to.

And please nobody tell me that they know BETTER than I, whether we, as individuals, go forward into the future or backward in our time, with each of our iterations of new life.

[-1-]

Many of the commenters recognized what Rawl and the author of the article hinted at with the reincarnation process, that those of us who have progeny who presently or near in the future are capable to procreate, are essentially a life form replicating our own selves, so without the unprovable mumble-jumble of reincarnation, the real thing, life itself, dictates the same norm of keeping the environment livable.

Another approach which nobody suggested, although I haven't read all 459 replies, is that if the climate changes, we can either adopt, by changing our micro environment's conditions compared to the macro environment, or a mutation of ours will be more suited for the new environment. Basically, bread-and-butter of Darwinian theory.

[-1-]

In fact, the environmental catastrophe may be the blessing in disguise. The human population is constantly increasing. At one point it may become so unsustainable, that war will break out.

This may be prevented by a world-wide population control, which I like to call baby embargo. Similar to the Chinese example, (but much better managed), we can reduce the Earth's human population, but only theoretically. Islam dictates as many children as possible for each household, so there goes the theory. You can't fight Islamic faith.

The worsening of the environmental conditions may decimate human population without wars, without effective family- and nation planning, and that is a horrible, but good thing.

[Serpent]

The reincarnation thing certainly seems to have caught people's attention -- rather out of proportion to the attention paid the concept of social justice. Seems American newspaper readers are very concerned with liberty and equality, as long as they get to be more equal and free than others.*

It's not a metaphysical proposition; it's a thought-experiment:

We don’t have to believe in reincarnation to fight for a world that we’d actually want to be born into.

Peoples who live in relative material comfort and security tend to relax their clutch on religious dogma, have fewer children and do a lot less fear-biting than peoples who live hungry and under threat of violence. The comfortable and secure also function better intellectually (stress consumes a lot of brain-activity) have more education, more leisure time to become informed, make sound political choices and solve problems. The more people live in security and comfort, the less strife and crowding, epidemic disease, territorial conflict, resource shortages and oppressive political regimes.
Pretty simple, really.