<p>From the definition of the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176513005132" rel="noreferrer">Rawlsian</a> approach</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Rawlsian approach to social welfare, built on the foundation of
the “veil of ignorance” (Rawls, 1999, p. 118)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>where &quot;<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascalemmanuelgobry/2015/01/06/hey-kids-lets-take-a-trip-behind-the-veil-of-ignorance/?sh=3369a67351a3" rel="noreferrer">veil of ignorance</a>&quot; is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So, for example, the veil of ignorance would lead people to refuse
slavery, because even though slavery is very convenient for
slave-owners, for slaves, not so much, and since behind the veil of
ignorance one would not know whether they would be a slave or a
slave-owner, they would refuse slavery</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>From, my understanding, it means that people refuse slavery because they do not know whether they are slave or slave-owner</strong></p>
<p>At this time, the <a href="https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/ambiguity-uncertainty-aversion/" rel="noreferrer">uncertainty avoidance</a> of behavioural economic also pops up on my head.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ambiguity aversion, or uncertainty aversion, is the tendency to favor
the known over the unknown, including known risks over unknown risks.
For example, when choosing between two bets, we are more likely to
choose the bet for which we know the odds, even if the odds are poor,
than the one for which we don’t know the odds.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Is there any overlap between these two theories?</strong></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-08-19T21:42:51.367Z
Note uncertainity avoidance, at least the vanilla one, is not behavioral economics, uncertainity avoidance is fully consistent with rationality, its a consequence of having concave utility function. Moreover, you are not only one who finds them similar, I even remember during my public policy seminar back during my Msc studies some student raised this question and teacher said its a common one, but as the +1 answer below explain the connection is not strong, also even people with high uncertainity avoidance are willing to take gambles if payoff is sufficiently high
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-08-19T23:45:50.243Z
@great note, thanks 1muflon1, a lot of great discussion today :D
Phil Nguyen
<theory><behavioral-economics><soft-question>
Is there any overlap between Rawlsian approach and uncertainty avoidance?
Phil Nguyen
# Is there any overlap between Rawlsian approach and uncertainty avoidance?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-08-19)

From the definition of the [Rawlsian](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176513005132) approach

> The Rawlsian approach to social welfare, built on the foundation of
> the “veil of ignorance” (Rawls, 1999, p. 118)

where "[veil of ignorance](https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascalemmanuelgobry/2015/01/06/hey-kids-lets-take-a-trip-behind-the-veil-of-ignorance/?sh=3369a67351a3)" is

> So, for example, the veil of ignorance would lead people to refuse
> slavery, because even though slavery is very convenient for
> slave-owners, for slaves, not so much, and since behind the veil of
> ignorance one would not know whether they would be a slave or a
> slave-owner, they would refuse slavery

**From, my understanding, it means that people refuse slavery because they do not know whether they are slave or slave-owner**

At this time, the [uncertainty avoidance](https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/ambiguity-uncertainty-aversion/) of behavioural economic also pops up on my head.

> Ambiguity aversion, or uncertainty aversion, is the tendency to favor
> the known over the unknown, including known risks over unknown risks.
> For example, when choosing between two bets, we are more likely to
> choose the bet for which we know the odds, even if the odds are poor,
> than the one for which we don’t know the odds.

**Is there any overlap between these two theories?**

**Tags:** theory, behavioral-economics, soft-question
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Note uncertainity avoidance, at least the vanilla one, is not behavioral economics, uncertainity avoidance is fully consistent with rationality, its a consequence of having concave utility function. Moreover, you are not only one who finds them similar, I even remember during my public policy seminar back during my Msc studies some student raised this question and teacher said its a common one, but as the +1 answer below explain the connection is not strong, also even people with high uncertainity avoidance are willing to take gambles if payoff is sufficiently high  
> **username_0**: @great note, thanks 1muflon1, a lot of great discussion today :D  

---

## 0 answers

