(Return to main path )

In a case like the new invention you mention, it seems to me that there is a simple solution. The people who would benefit from the invention simply compensate the small groups that would loose from its adoption. I don't see the problem. I think that's exactly what Rawls would advocate.

Consider a real world case something like what you describe. Almost everyone gained when we started pumping our own gasoline back in the seventies. Almost all of us gained when elevator operators were replaced by self-operated elevators. But, of course, someone did lose -- mostly young men who pumped gas and the people who operated elevators. Perhaps Rawls' principle would requires us to compensate those people with a job training program to help them get new jobs. Is that so counter-intuitive? Maybe that's how a just society should operate?