People should be free to find or make for themselves the kinds of educational experiences they want their children to have. We are to imagine that those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social benefits. Humans are to decide in advance how they are to regulate their claims against one another and what is to be the foundation charter of their society. Just as each person must decide by rational reflection what constitutes one’s good, that is, the system of ends which it is rational for one to pursue, so a group of persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust. The choice which rational people would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty, assuming for the present that this choice problem has a solution, determines the principles of justice. In justice as fairness the original position of equality corresponds to the state of nature in the traditional theory of the social contract. This original position is not, of course, thought of as an actual historical sate of affairs, much less as a primitive condition of culture. It is understood as a purely hypothetical situation characterized so as to lead to a certain conception of justice. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24

Among the essential features of this situation is that no one knows one’s place in society, one’s class position or social statue, nor does any one know one’s fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, one’s 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. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. This ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances. Since all are similarly situated and no one is able to design principles to favour one’s particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain. For given the circumstances of the original position, the symmetry of everyone’s relations to each other, this initial situation is fair between individuals as moral persons, that is, as rational beings with their own needs and capable, I shall assume, of a sense of justice. The original position is, one might say, the appropriate initial status quo, and thus the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair. The name does not mean that the concepts of justice and fairness are the same, any more than the phrase “poetry as metaphor” means that the concepts of poetry and metaphor are the same. #RandolphHarris 2 of 24

Justice as fairness begins, as I have said, with one of the most general of all choices which persons might make together, namely, with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. Then, having chosen a conception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitution and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially agreed upon. Our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we would have contracted into the general system of rules which defines it. Moreover, assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles (that is, that a particular conception of justice would be chosen), it will then be true that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles those engaged in them can say to one another that they are cooperating on terms to which they would agree if they were free and equal persons whose relations with respect to one another were fair. They could all view their arrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledge in an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable constraints on the choice of principles. The general recognition of this fact would provide the basic for a public acceptance of the corresponding principles of justice. #RandolphHarris 3 of 24

No society can, of course, be a scheme of cooperation which humans enter voluntarily in a literal sense; each person finds oneself placed at birth in some particular position in some particular society, and the nature of this position materially affects one’s life prospects. Yet a society satisfying the principles of justice as fairness comes as close as a society can to being a voluntary scheme, for it meets the principles which free and equal persons would assent to under circumstances that are fair. In this sense its members are autonomous and the obligations they recognize self-imposed. One feature of justice as fairness is to think of the parities in the initial situation as rational and mutually disinterested. This does not mean that the parties are egoists, that is, individuals with only certain kinds of interests, say in wealth, prestige, and domination. However, they are conceived as not taking an interest in one another’s interests. They are to presume that even their spiritual aims may be opposed in the way that the aims of those of different religions may be opposed. Moreover, the concept of rationality must be interpreted as far as possible in the narrow sense, standard in economic theory, of taking the most effective means to given ends. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24

In working out the conception of justice as fairness one main task clearly is to determine which principles of justice would be chosen in the original position. To do this we must describe this situation in some detail and formulate with care the problem of choice which it presents. It may be observed, however, that once the principles of justice are thought of as arising from an original agreement in a situation of equality, it is an open question whether the principle of utility would be acknowledged. Offhand it hardly seems likely that persons who view themselves as equals, entitled to press their claims upon one another, would agree to a principle which may require lesser life prospects for some simply for the sake of a greater sum of advantages enjoyed by others. Since each desires to protect one’s interests, one’s capacity to advance one’s conception of the good, no one has a reason to acquiesce in an enduring loss for oneself in order to bring about a greater net balance of satisfaction. In the absence of strong and lasting benevolent impulses, a rational human would not accept a basic structure merely because it maximized the algebraic sum of advantages irrespective of its permanent effects on one’s own basic rights and interests. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24

 Thus it seems that the principle of utility is incompatible with the conception of social cooperation among equals for mutual advantage. It appears to be inconsistent with the idea of reciprocity implicit in the nation of a well-ordered society. The persons in the initial situation would choose two rather different principles: the first requires equality in the assignment of basic rights and duties, while the second holds that social and economic inequalities, for example inequalities of wealth and authority, are just only if they result in compensating benefits for everyone, and in particular for the least advantaged members of society. These principles rule out justifying institutions on the grounds that the hardships of some are offset by a greater good in the aggregate. It may be expedient but it is not just that some should have less in order that others may prosper. However, there is no injustice in the greater benefits earned by a few provided that the situation of persons not so fortunate is thereby improved. The intuitive idea is that since everyone’s well-being depends upon a scheme of cooperation without which no one could have a satisfactory life, the division of advantages should be such as to draw forth the willing cooperation of everyone taking part in it, including those less well situated. Yet, only if reasonable terms are proposed, can this be expected. #RandolphHarris 6 of 24

The two principals mentioned seem to be a fair agreement on the basis of which those better endowed, or more fortunate in their social position, neither of which we can be said to deserve, could expect the willing cooperation of others when some workable scheme is a necessary condition of the welfare of all. Once we decide to look for a conception of justice that nullifies the accidents of natural endowment and the contingencies of social circumstances as counters in quest for political and economic advantage, we are led to these principles. They express the result of leaving aside those aspects of the social World that seem arbitrary from a moral point of view. The problem of the choice of principles, however, is extremely difficult. I do not expect the answer I shall suggest to be convincing to everyone. It is, therefore, worth noting from the outset that justice as fairness, like other contract views, consists of two parts: (1) an interpretation of the initial situation and of the problem of choice posed there, and (2) a set of principles which, it is argued, would be agreed to. One may accept the first part of the theory (or some variant thereof), but not the other, and conversely. The concept of the initial contractual situation may seem reasonable although the particular principles proposed are rejected. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24

To be sure, I want to maintain that the most appropriate conception of this situation does lead to principles of justice contrary to utilitarianism and perfectionism, and therefore that the contract doctrine provides an alternative to these views. Still, one may dispute this contention even though one grants that the contractarian method is a useful way of studying ethical theories and of setting forth their underlying assumptions. Justice as fairness is an example of what I have called a contract theory. Now there may be an objection to the term “contract” and related expressions, but I think it will serve reasonably well. Many words have misleading connotations which at first are likely to confuse. The terms “utility” and “utilitarianism” are surely no exception. They too have unfortunate suggestions which hostile critics have been willing to exploit; yet they are clear enough for those prepared to study utilitarian doctrine. The same should be true of the term “contract” applied to moral theories. As I have mentioned to understand it one has to keep in mind that it implies a certain level of abstraction. In particular, the content of the relevant agreement is not to enter a given society or to adopt a given form of government, but to accept certain moral principles. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24

Moreover, the undertakings referred to are purely hypothetical: a contract view holds that certain principles would be accepted in a well-defined initial situation. The merit of the contract terminology is that it conveys the idea that principles of justice may be conceived as principles that would be chosen by rational persons, and that in this way conceptions of justice may be explained and justified. The theory of justice is a part, perhaps the most significant part, of the theory of rational choice. Furthermore, principles of justice deal with conflicting claims upon the advantages won by social cooperation; they apply to the relations among several persons or groups. The word “contract” suggests this plurality as well as the condition that the appropriate division of advantages must be in accordance with principles acceptable to all parties. The condition of publicity for principles of justice is also connoted by the contract phraseology. Thus, if these principles are the outcome of an agreement, citizens have a knowledge of the principles that others follow. It is characteristic of contract theories to stress the public nature of political principles. Finally there is the long tradition of the contract doctrine. Expressing the tie with this line of thought helps to define ideas and accords with natural piety. There are then several advantages in the use of the term “contract.” With due precautions taken, it should not be misleading.  RandolphHarris 9 of 24

A final remark. Justice as fairness is not a complete contract theory. For it is clear that the contractarian idea can be extended to the choice of more or less an entire ethical system, that is, to a system including principles for all virtues and not only for justice. Now for the most part I shall consider only principles of justice and others closely related to them; I make no attempt to discuss the virtues in a systematic way. Obviously if justice as fairness succeeds reasonably well, a next step would be to study the more general view suggested by the name “rightness as fairness. However, even this wider theory fails to embrace all moral relationships, since it would seem to include only our relations with other persons and to leave out of account how we are to conduct ourselves toward animals and the rest of nature. I do not contend that the contract notion offers a way to approach these questions which are certainly of the first importance; and I shall have to put them aside. We must recognize the limited scope of justice as fairness and of the general type of view that it exemplifies. How far its conclusions must be revised once these other matters are understood cannot be decided in advance. Is there any evidence that an organization which focuses on persons and their potential can function as effectively as a conventional hierarchical outfit? There is indeed. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24

A team of investigators under Rensis Likert made a study of supervision in an insurance company. First they measure productivity and morale in the supervised groups and divided them into those that were high and low on these measures. They found significant differences in the behaviour, methods, and personalities of supervisors of the high-productivity, high-morale groups and the qualities of the supervisors of the low groups. In the working units with high records, supervisors and group leaders were interested primarily in the workers as people, and interest in production was secondary. Supervisors encouraged group participation and discussion, and decision-making about work problems and policies was a shared process. Interestingly, supervisors in these “high” units did not supervise closely the work being done, but trusted the worker to carry the responsibility for doing good work. The supervisors units where productive and morale were low showed the opposite behaviours. They were concerned primarily with production, they made the decisions without consultation, and they supervised the work very closely. One could hardly find clearer evidence of the results of a person-centered approach. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24

Later this initial study was extended by Likert to some give thousand assorted organization. Again, he had gone into these companies and identified the high-producing managers and the low-producers, ignoring, for purposes of his study, all those in between. Harold Lyon, who endeavored not very successfully to introduce a person-centered approach into the administration of government bureaucracy in a federal department, gives an excellent summary of Likert’s findings. The high-producers were very “people-oriented.” People were unique individuals to them. The low-producers, on the other hand, were “production-oriented.” People were tools to get the job done. The high-producers were good delegators; the low-producers were not. The high producers allowed their subordinates to participate in decisions. The low-producers were very autocratic. The high-producers were relatively nonpunitive. The low-producers were quite punitive. The high-producers had good, open, two-way personal communication flow. The low-producers were closed and relatively inaccessible. The high-producers had few formal meetings at which only one or two people spoke. They did not have to meet often, since they had such open communication flow. This is interesting, judging by the frequency of meetings in the bureaucracy. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24

The low-producers had frequent formal meetings at which only the chiefs spoke, usually giving explicit instructions. The high-producers had a lot of pride in their work groups. The low-producers were plagued by low morale. The high-producers planned ahead effectively. They were not just soft or goody-goody human-relations types. The low-producers did not plan well. In times of crisis, the high-producers maintained their supervisory roles, whereas the low-producers rolled up their sleeves and pitched in with the work. If there as a hole in the dike, the low-producer would go down and put one’s finger in it. Then, when another hole developed, there was no supervisor to send to this area. A quite different type of study was completed by G.W. Cherry. He utilized highly sophisticated research methods and appropriate statistical techniques to study the following questions and their interrelationships: What kind of person is the “fully functioning person” or the “self-actualized person”? Can behavioural scientists objectively define this person? What kind of person does the larger organization—private or public—wish to have as a high-level manager? Can this person be objectively defined? How does the desired manager of question 2 compare with the fully functioning person of question 1? #RandolphHarris 13 of 24

How do the characteristics of the fully functioning person relate to the real productive, creative, interpersonal cooperation, and job satisfaction of actual managers? Without going into his methods I will try to state his findings in a simplified fashion. He found in the first place that experienced behavioural scientists were in very substantial agreement in giving an objective description of the fully functioning person. He found that thirty-seven senior level managers, in significant executive posts, were able to give an objective picture of the kind of manager desired by the organizations they worked for. Not too surprisingly, there was a considerable difference between the two pictures. The sharpest differences: The self-actualizing person has significantly more of these characteristics than the desirable manager. Engages in personal fantasy, daydreams, and fictional speculations. Express hostile feelings directly. Enjoys sensuous experiences (including touch, taste, smell, physical contact). Thinks and associates to ideas in unusual ways; has unconventional thought processes. Is concerned with philosophical problems; exempli gratia, religion, values, the meaning of life, et cetera. Enjoys esthetic impressions, is esthetically reactive. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24

These persons also enjoy esthetic impressions, are esthetically reactive. Has insight into own motives and behaviour. Are skilled in social techniques of imaginative play, pretending, and humour, and values one’s own independence and autonomy. Clearly, from these examples one gets a picture of the self-actualizing person as a warmer, more original, more open, expressive individual, with broad philosophical and artistic interests, with more appreciation of one’s psychological and physical self. The “ideal” manager, for instance, holds back negative and positive feelings. The fully functioning person expresses both warm and hostile feelings openly. The “ideal” manager is much close to the public stereotype of a “leader”—dependable, productive, serious, candid, someone you can lean on, but not a dreamer or a philosopher, nor an entirely autonomous person. One may well react, “So what? these are simply two different ideals. The self-actualizing person probably would not be a good manager.” Here Cherry’s answer to his fourth question is of interest. Would a self-actualizing person be a good manager? By an ingenious method he was able to answer this question. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24

He discovered that the cluster of traits having to do with warmth, capacity for close interpersonal relationships, compassion, and considerateness correlated very significantly with the qualities of productive, creative, cooperativeness and job satisfaction. A person-centered manager, it would seem, would be of more value to the organization than a stereotypical leader. Another finding was that the person who recognizes and shares negative feelings and information (as well as beneficial), who is feelingful but not overprotective, is more likely to be productive—and less likely to be satisfied with one’s job! Finally, a cluster of characteristics often associated with management—power-oriented, aggressive, exploitative, achieving goals by manipulation and/or deceit—is not correlate with productivity, and have a negative correlation with creativity, cooperativeness, and job satisfaction. All of this seems to point to the somewhat surprising conclusion that the person who is able to develop close interpersonal relationships, who is primarily person-centered, who does not place a high value on power, who is a growing person with understanding of oneself, is, all in all, likely to be the most effective and productive manager of an enterprise. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24

Of course we need to do all these things that turn our thoughts to God in close association with others who know the realities of spiritual formation by such means. Spiritual formation cannot, in the nature of the case, be a “private” thing, because it is a matter of whole-life transformation. You need to seek out others in your community who are pursuing the renovation of the heart. Hopefully, they might even be members of your own family on in a nearby congregation of Christians. However, this is not always possible. We must pray that God will lead us to others who can walk with us with Christ—whoever and wherever they may be. And then in patience stay with them. This will naturally lead us to include, under means, the identification of other practitioners of The Way. We need to understand those who have learned how to live with a transformed mind and study carefully what they did—not necessarily in order to do exactly what they did, for they are not lawgivers, nor are they always right, much less perfect. However, we cannot easily or wisely dispense with what they have learned and what can be learned from them. Look at the details of how they have lived their lives and then sensibly adapt those details to your life. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24

Some time back my wife and I visited the haunts of St. Francis of Assisi. I noticed that the people there in charge of his remembrances were not doing the things he did. They did what we might call acts “symbolic” of Francis, but not what he did. How odd! It is not odd, however, that they fail to have his inner life and his outer effect. There is much more to be said on the details of the means. However, if we take in God through his Word and walk the way of those who know by experience the transformation of the mind, that transformation, with its natural and supernatural effects, will come to us and pervade every dimension of our person. God will see to it! Clear your mind, and you become more ready to open yourself to the holy presence. We must also remember to honour God in our prayers. God is more powerful than we are—more glorious, possessing more wisdom—and this should be recognized. In my own prayers, I prefer a simple: “I offer you my worship,” or “I do honour,” or “I praise you, I honour you, I worship you.” It is also a good idea to offer prayers of thanksgiving. “And it came to pass that when they had established a church in that land, that king Lamoni desired that Ammon should go with him to the land of Nephi, that he might show him unto his father. #RandolphHarris 18 of 24

“And the voice of the Lord came to Ammon, saying: Thou shalt not go up to the land of Nephi, for behold, the king will seek thy life; but thou shalt go to the land of Middoni; for behold, thy brother Aaron, and also Muloki and Ammah are in prison. Now it came to pass that when Ammon had heard this, he said unto Lamoni: Behold, my brother and brethren are in prison at Middoni and I go that I may deliver them. Now Lamoni said unto Ammon: I know, in the strength of the Lord thou canst so all things. However, behold, I will go with thee to the land of Middoni, that I may flatter the king of the land, and he will cast thy brethren out of prison. Now Lamoni said unto him: Who told thee that thy brethren were in prison? And Ammon said unto him: No one hath told me, save it be God; and he said unto me—Go and deliver thy brethren, for they are in prison in the land of Middoni. Now when Lamoni had heard this he caused that his servants should make ready his horses and his chariots. And he said unto Ammon: Come, I will go with thee down to the land of Middoni, and there I will plead with the king that he will cast thy brethren out of prison. And it came to pass that as Ammon and Lamoni were journeying thither, they met the father of Lamoni, who was king over all the land. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24

“And behold, the father of Lamoni said unto him: Why did ye not come to the feast on that great day when I made a feast unto my sons, and unto my people? And he also said: Whither art thou going with this Nephite, who is one of the children of a liar? And it came to pass that Lamoni rehearsed unto him wither he was going, for e feared to offend him. And he also told him all the cause of his tarrying in his own kingdom, that he did not go unto his father to the feast which he had prepared. And now when Lamoni had rehearsed unto him all these things, behold, to his astonishment, his father was angry with him, and said: Lamoni, thou art going to deliver these Nephites, who are sons of a liar. Behold, he robbed our fathers; and now his children are also come amongst us that they may, by their cunning and their lying, deceive us, that they again may rob us of our property. Now the father of Lamoni commanded him that he should slay Ammon with the sword. And he also commanded him that he should not go to the land of Middoni, but the he should return with him to the land of Ishmael. However, Lamoni said unto him: I will not slay Ammon, neither will I return to the land of Ishmael, but I go to the land of Middoni that I may release the brethren of Ammon, for I know that they are just men and holy prophets of the true God. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24

“Now when his father had heard these words, he was angry with him, and he drew his sword that he might smite him o Earth. However, Ammon stood forth and said unto him: Behold, thou shalt not slay thy son; nevertheless, it were better that he should fall than thee, for behold, he has repented of his sins; but if thou shouldst fall at this time, in thine anger, thy soul could not be saved. And again, it is expedient that thou shouldst forbear; for if thou shouldst slay thy son, he being an innocent man, his blood would cry from the ground to the Lord his God, for vengeance to come upon thee; and perhaps thou wouldst lose thy soul. Now when ammon had said these words unto him, he answered him, saying: I know that if I should slay my son, that I should shed innocent blood; for it is thou that hast sought to destroy him. And he stretched forth his hand to slay Ammon. However, Ammon withstood his blows, and also smoke his arm that he could not use it. Now when the king saw that Ammon could slay him, he began to plead with Ammon hat he would spare his life. However, Ammon raised his sword, and said unto him: Behold, I will smite thee except thou wilt grant unto me that my brethren may be cast out of prison. #RandolphHarris 21 of 24

“Now the king, fearing he should lose his life, said: If thou wilt spare me I will grant unto thee whatsoever thou wilt ask, even to half of the kingdom. Now when Ammon saw that he had wrought upon the old king according to his desire, he said unto him: If thou wilt grant that my brethren may be cast out of prison, and also that Lamoni may retain his kingdom, and that ye be not displeased with him, but grant that he may do according to his own desires in whatsoever thing he thinketh, then will I spare thee; otherwise I will smite thee to the Earth. Now when Ammon had said these words, the king began to rejoice because of his life. And when he say that Ammon had no desire to destroy him, and when he also saw the great love he had for his son Lamoni, he was astonished exceedingly, and said: Because this is all that thou hast desired, that I would release thy brethren, and suffer that my son Lamoni should retain his kingdom from this time and forever; and I will govern him no more—and I will also grant unto thee that thy brethren may be cast out of prison, and thou and thy brethren may come unto me, in my kingdom; for I shall greatly desire to see thee. For the king was greatly astonished at the words which he had spoken by his son Lamoni, therefore he was desirous to learn them. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24

“And it came to pass that Ammon and Lamoni proceeded on their journey toward the land of Middoni, And Lamoni found favour in the eyes of the king of the land; therefore the brethren of Ammon were brought forth our of prison. And when Ammon did meet them he was exceedingly sorrowful, for behold they were naked, and their skins were worn exceedingly because of being bound with strong cords. And they also had suffered hunger, thirst, and all kinds of afflictions; nevertheless they were patient in all their sufferings. And, as it happened, it was their lot to have fallen into the hands of a more hardened and a more stiffnecked people; therefore they would not hearken unto their words, and they had cast them out, and had smitten them, and had driven them from house to house, and from place to place, even until they had arrived in the land of Middoni; and there they were taken and cast into prison, and bound with strong cords, and kept in prison for many days, and were delivered by Lamoni and Ammon,” reports Alma 20.1-30. Scriptures are like packets of light that illuminate our minds and give place to guidance and inspiration from on high. They can become the key to open the channel to communion with our Father in Heaven and His Beloved Son, Jesus Christ. Pondering a passage of scripture can be a key to unlock revelation and the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Ghost.  #RandolphHarris 23 of 24

Scriptures can calm an agitated soul, giving peace, hope, and a restoration of confidence in one’s ability to overcome the challenges of life. They have potent power to heal emotional challenges when there is faith in the Saviour. They can accelerate physical healing. God rules over the Universe. He descends to death; He ascends to life. Neither death nor life can hold Him. By remembering God, we grow closer to Him. The Spirit of God exists in strength. His roots are deep in the Earth, His loving grace pierces the air and mounts to the sky above. God’s power dances from flat to peak and, spiraling, descends again. God, when I come under your trees and upon your stones, please guide me. Almighty and everlasting God, the Source and Perfection of all virtues; please grant us, we beseech Thee, both to do what is right and to preach what is true; that both by action and teaching we may afford to Thy faithful people the instruction which is of Thy grace; though Jesus Christ our Lord, all righteous things are possible. The Earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof; the World, and they that dwell therein. For He hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods. May we receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of His salvation. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24

Home Site 77 at #PlumasRanch is fully finished and ready for move-in! This Residence 3 floor plan is 2,827 square feet with four bedrooms, two & one half bathrooms, and a three car garage. 😍 As an added bonus, the location of the Owner’s Suite makes it feel like a separate wing from the rest of the home allowing for maximum privacy and retreat. 🙌Get in touch at PlumasRanch@Cresleigh.com to schedule a viewing! https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/move-in-ready-home-site-77/

Everlasting God, the source of all the virtues  and completion; please bless us; we will exercise that right to like by righteousness, and to tell the truth; by teaching through your holy scriptures the instruction of the faithful, and by the grace of Thy holiness, we have all the direction we need to place complete trust in you. Thank you for this beautiful live, on this wonderful planet, and for allowing us to achieve our dreams. #CresleighHomes