Justification to other people › Generic reasons and individual standpoints

Scanlon appeals to generic reasons: reasons people have in virtue of their situation, described in general terms. Avoiding bodily injury, being able to rely on assurances and having control over one's body are examples. A reason can be generic even when only a small number of people occupy the relevant position. Generic does not mean average or shared by the majority.

This lets us consider principles without depending on the identities of the people who happen to be affected today. A permission to disregard assurances would affect potential recipients of assurances. Their reasons can be assessed as reasons attaching to a position. The comparison need not wait until a particular person has already suffered the consequences.

At the same time, describing positions generally must not erase important differences. Someone who needs help with a serious disability may have an objection that a more fortunate person does not share. A general description can include that need. Treating everyone as if they had the same capabilities would remove information relevant to justification.

The distinction helps explain how a universal principle can take differing circumstances into account. Equal standing concerns whose reasons count in the assessment; it does not require that every person have identical reasons or receive identical treatment. We still need to justify which differences matter for the principle being considered.