Assignment task: Consider this passage from A Theory of Justice:
Among the essential features of....[the original position] is that no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like. I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities.
In this passage, Rawls advances a certain fact about, or imposes a certain condition on, the original position.
(1a) What's Rawls' justification for this condition?
Now consider the following. Philosopher Philo offers the following argument against Rawlsian Social Contract Theory (RSCT).
"RSCT has the following feature: if RSCT is true, then nothing can be right, wrong, or obligatory without or independently of agreement. (The Rawlsian claims that our obligations derive from the moral code people in the original position would agree to live under). Given this feature, Rawls has no convincing reason to deny that treating a person unfairly may well be wrong prior to, or independently of, agreement. Therefore, RSCT is not true."
(1b) Is Philo's objection a good or persuasive objection against RSCT? (Answer: One of Yes, it is persuasive or No, it is not persuasive.)
(1c) Explain or justify your answer to (1b).
Note: There is no need to present the objector's argument against RSCT in premise and conclusion form to answer correctly this question. Indeed, I recommend that you don't do so.