Are Rawls' arguments for the Difference Principle convincing?

Introduction In order to critique Rawls' arguments for the Difference Principle (DP), we must first begin by clarifying the building blocks of his theory of justice. Firstly, Rawls proposes the notion of an original position which places one behind the veil of ignorance. Behind this veil, one is not privy to the knowledge of one's sex, race, physical condition, family background etc. The only knowledge one possesses is that of the different situations humans may …

…argument, but rather futile in reality. Conclusion In conclusion, the DP may seem like an intuitively fair alternative to the strictly utilitarian or egalitarian standpoints; however, on further inspection, it may not be as compelling due to different reasons raised by theorists such as the utilitarians, libertarians, egalitarians and the desert-based theorists. Also, other theoretical, definitional or operational flaws may render the DP a less convincing theory that it seemed to be at first glance.