John Rawls' Difference Principle has been well known since his early papers on distributive justice, and has taken on renewed interest with the publication ofA Theory of Justice. The principle is one I find attractive, but I am skeptical of the arguments heretofore put forward in its defence. Here I will outline an entirely different defence which, while it may yield Rawls' desired conclusion, leaves one with a rather different picture from his of the place of the Difference Principle in (...) the theory of distributive justice. (shrink)

It would not be surprising to find a philosopher deploying subjunctive conditionals in defence of a position or as part of an analysis of a concept. One might defend the view that events in the far past, or objects on the other side of the moon, are observable in principle by pointing out that if an observer had been present, or if an observer were on the other side of the moon, he would have made, or would make, certain observations. (...) Similarly, someone might argue that a statement to the effect that there are mountains on the other side of the moon simply means “If there were an observer on the other side of the moon, he would have such and such experiences”. In the same vein, one might argue that “x wants Φ” means “If such and such were the case, x would do A”. (shrink)

Thus consciousness belief and belief are one and the same being, the characteristic of which is absolute immanence. But as soon as we wish to grasp this being, it slips between our fingers, and we find ourselves faced with a pattern of duality, with a game of reflections. For consciousness is a reflection, but qua reflection it is exactly the one reflecting, and if we attempt to grasp it as reflecting, it vanishes and we fall back on the reflection.

Patricia Kitcher has argued that there is an anomaly in our thought about ourselves. Her thesis turns on a claim concerning our attitude toward an imagined case, and on an argument that the attitude is irrational.The example, E, is as follows. Suppose you are told today that tomorrow you will lose those capacities, whatever they may be, in virtue of which you are a person. After this happens, the body which is now yours will be tortured. Pain will be felt.