affairs that is characterized so as to lead to a certain conception of justice, and one of the essential features of this conception is that no one knows his position in society, his position or social class, nor his fortune in terms of the distribution of natural abilities. The fairness derives from the fact that no one is able to shape the discussion or the agreement to fit his particular circumstances or to gain an advantage over his neighbors. Justice as fairness begins with the general choices a group of persons makes together with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice that will regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. The concept of justice must be determined before the people choose a government or other institutions, and justice is the basis for all the later choices. Rawls considers the conditions under which this choice of justice is made and notes again the hypothetical nature of the state of nature that serves as the point of origin. The fact that the group remains ignorant of individual advantages is what makes their decision rational and fair at the same time, for if they knew what their positions would be, they would shape the concept of justice to fit their particular place and their particular circumstance and so would obviate the necessary fairness. The parties in the original agreement must be assumed to have been equal, with all having the same rights in the process of choosing principles of justice. This equality is represented in a conception of human beings as moral persons, as creatures with a conception of the good and able to have a sense of justice. Rawls says that the term "good" has a constant meaning for philosophical purposes. He states:
There is no necessity to assign "good" a special kind of meaning which is not already explained by its constant descriptive sense and the general theory of speech acts (Rawls, A Theory of Justice 405).
Goodness ...