Social contract theory puts at the center ideal contractors. But what if ideal contractors could legitimately disagree about what arrangements would be preferable all things considered? If that is possible, this could undermine the whole theory. Even if the veil of ignorance reduces bias, it might not be enough to eradicate all of it. Suppose it did: I cannot imagine myself behind the veil of ignorance very well. The person behind the veil is an agent very different from me (I have many unique goals and interests and weaknesses), so why am I held to such an elite, lofty ideal I couldn't myself agree to? Moreover, if social contract theory is only for those who could contract, then doesn't this mean animals have no moral worth or say?
www.jonathanvajda.com
Email: philosophyvajda@gmail.com for questions, topic recommendations, interviews, direct instruction arrangements, etc.
Twitter: @jonathanvajda
If you want to say thanks with a tip or gift (say, buy me coffee?), I can accept PayPal, BTC, ETH and ADA. See my support landing page: jonathanvajda.com/support/