Rawls begins his thought experiment with something he calls the "Original Position." The Original Position is the equivalent to what other political philosopher's call the "state of nature." Like the idea of the state of nature, the Original Position is not something that actually exists in the world itself; rather, it is an idea that serves and functions as a starting point to help facilitate a discussion. To really get into the Original Position we first must cast away our prejudices and preconceived notions. Like in the state of nature, the idea of the Original Position asks us to think about a world without any government at all. Instead, we are to start from scratch and ask ourselves what would be the best way to achieve justice in society. The basic question posed by the Original Position is: How would we set up a governance in society that maximizes justice for everyone (and not just the majority)? In his own words, Rawls describes the Original Position as "the appropriate initial status quo which insures that the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair."2 This ties into the idea of a social contract theory and Rawls theory of what is justice. For Rawls, in the original position, justices is fairness if it connects with the idea of rational choice. He sums up this idea by stating: one conception of justice is more reasonable than another, or justifiable with respect to it, if rational persons in the initial situation would choose its principles over those of the other for the role of justice. Conceptions of justice are to be ranked by their acceptability to people so circumstance. Understood in this way the question of justification is settled by working out a problem of deliberation... 3 I think the Original Position, even if it is just an idea to use as a thought experiment, provides a fertile proving ground for thinking about what is true justice and the formation of an ideal society that maximizes justice for everyone...