How can we tell if a decision is fair?
A good clue: a fair decision is the one we'd make impartially, without tipping the scales toward our own side.
The veil of ignorance
The philosopher John Rawls became famous for a test. Imagine you're going to choose the rules of the world, but you don't yet know who you'll be in it. You could be born rich or poor, healthy or sick, of any race or gender. Whatever you'd choose under those conditions would be what's fair.
What about animals?
Rawls thought this test didn't apply to animals, because they don't have a sense of justice. The author answers: to be held responsible for an injustice, you need a sense of justice. But to suffer an injustice, you don't. Babies don't have a sense of justice either, and they can be treated unjustly.
The philosopher Mark Rowlands points out something else: the veil exists to erase advantages that come from luck, like the traits you're born with. And being born human or being born a pig is also a matter of luck.
What we'd decide behind the veil
Now imagine you don't know whether you'll be born human or another animal.
- Animal exploitation: would you accept animal agriculture knowing you might be born as a chicken on a factory farm? You'd probably find it very unfair.
- Speciesism: would you accept a rule that gives less weight to anyone who isn't human? Probably not.
- Wild animals: would you accept that nobody helps the animals suffering from hunger and disease in the wild, knowing you could be one of them? Probably not either.
In short
- Fair decisions are the ones we'd make without knowing who we'd be.
- You don't need a sense of justice to suffer an injustice.
- Behind the veil, we'd reject exploitation, speciesism, and abandoning wild animals.