John Rawls attempts to create an ethical system based on a uiversal sense of fairness. The problem is that such a system is inherently arbitrary. Who decides wh

John Rawls attempts to create an ethical system based on a uiversal sense of fairness. The problem is that such a system is inherently arbitrary. Who decides what's fair? Treating everyone equally isn't necessarily fair: Forcing everyone to live in the same housing regardless of health issues certainly isn't fair but neither is creating a system that tries to balance individual needs into a sort of universal scale a such a thing doesn't exist. Furthermore it misses the point that ethics is ultimately an individual issue as it's individuals who make ethical decisions. The moment that you have a bunch of people in clouds planning what the world should be like you've missed the whole point, which is 'what is justice?' which is an entirely different question, but 'How should I behave?' That is, Ethics is not so much the search for a universal code of action, but the search for a principles in human behavior. With this realize that the search is not for a better means of wealth distribution but for the best set of virtues that a man can embody. Thus the question is not whether Larry Ellison should buy another Yacht or immitate Mother Theresa, but whether he should practice is fortitude or his charity, his temperance or his, decisiveness. Of course such things as universal codes of ethics come into play here, but they are tangential to the key issues.