3 ms·

Okay, I see your point. We should probably be aware that such risk tolerances can change though.

• nickff 4y ago
  All preferences change over time; this is one of many problems with Rawls' logic.
  • guerrilla 4y ago
    > All preferences change over time; this is one of many problems with Rawls' logic. No, not even close. Aversion to torture and torture doesn't. Need for air, water, food, hygiene, clothes, shelter, etc. doesn't.
    • chongli 4y ago
      People's risk aversion changes throughout their lives. Young people, in general, tend to be much less risk averse than older people. This makes sense, since young people have not accumulated as much property and so have a lot less to lose.
      • guerrilla 4y ago
        That's what I said. Risk aversion can (and often does) change. Some preferences don't (and can't) though.
  • ggrrhh_ta 4y ago
    There is a simple way around that argument; instead of getting some random (according to whatever distribution) characteristics, be bound to have higher probability of obtaining those characteristics you would be the least bound to be fair to (as individuals). So, if one considers that slavery or torture is perfectly OK, then that person will become a slave or tortured.