[lit-ideas] That's No Cricket -- Oxford Criticises Rawls
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:58:00 EDT
----
I would think 'fair involves some degree of inequality' has to be taken
with a pinch of cricket.
The idea is:
in a game of cricket, all players are assumed to be equal. None of them is
allowed to have steroids, or to have three arms, either.
The veil of ignorance is: some players (who are more fit than others) will
count as _just_ as fit, within the canon.
There may be other 'inqualities' Rawls's simile allows us to understand
when applied to cricket.
It cannot apply to the 'constitutive rules' of the game: 'if the team
includes the Prince of Wales, there is an extra 80% of probability that his
team will win".
Neither 'regulative rules': one team will not be allowed to use a bat.
-----
Cheers,
JLS
**************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] That's No Cricket -- Oxford Criticises Rawls - Jlsperanza
