A Theory of Justice by John Rawls holds that a rational and mutually disinterested individual, in the original position and assigned the task of establishing social rules to maximize his or her happiness throughout life, and can choose as principles of justice a) the guarantee of fundamental freedoms and b) the cancellation of social and economic disparities through universal equality of opportunities, which must be of maximum benefit to the least advantaged members of society. Rawls's system of social creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound. One of the strengths is the inherent compulsion to look after the interests of the entire society through the Veil of Ignorance. It is not possible to look after the interests of a single particular ethnic, political or social group due to uncertainty regarding which groups they will belong to within society, so they grant all individuals “freedom of thought, [of religion], freedom personal and political". This sets a precedent of equality for all and ensures a fair standard of living. It could be argued that behind the Veil of Ignorance, society will be able to develop such fundamental rights and equalities naturally. Considering that modern society can be considered to have developed laws and cultural rules without the veil of ignorance, it is obvious that the principles suggested by Rawls are not necessary. Considering gender inequality, German Aryanism and its sharp decline suggest that society is self-correcting, particularly if the society in question exists in the modern era where international pressure is exerted for the maintenance of fundamental freedoms, l equality of opportunity and support for the disadvantaged. . The representative behind the Veil of Igno... middle of paper... interested, so in practice it is unreasonable to assume such altruism on his behalf. To conclude, Rawls' strength lies in his attention to the individual, protection of freedoms and equal opportunities in support of a healthy society. Criticisms of his theory include the question of what is best for society as a whole, the rejection of beneficial inequalities, and the potential for society to develop its own ethical code as in reality. These criticisms, however, do not stand up to close scrutiny, and it is my opinion that John Rawls' principles are in order. Works Cited Brock, Gillian. Phil 103 Freedom, Rights and Justice: Department of Philosophy, University of Auckland, 2011.Mill, John S. On Liberty. 4th ed. London: Penguin Books Ltd, 1974. Rawls, John. A theory of justice. Original edition. Cambridge: Mass Harvard University Press, 1971.