There are infinitely many variations of the initial situation and therefore no doubt indefinitely many theorems of moral geometry.

First of all, no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status; nor does he know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence and strength, and the like. Nor, again, does anyone know his conception of the good, the particulars of his rational plan of life, or even the special features of psychology such as his aversion to risk or liability to optimism or pessimism. More than this, I assume that the parties do not know the particular circumstances of their own society. That is, they do not know its particular economic or political situation, or the level of civilization and culture it has been able to achieve. The persons in the original position have no information as to which generation they belong.

If A were not allowed his better position, B would be even worse off than he is.

No one deserves his greater natural capacity nor merits a more favorable starting place in society.

The difference principle, for example, requires that the higher expectations of the more advantaged contribute to the prospects of the least advantaged.

Greater intelligence, wealth and opportunity, for example, allow a person to achieve ends he could not rationally contemplate otherwise.

In justice as fairness society is interpreted as a cooperative venture for mutual advantage.

The even larger difference between rich and poor makes the latter even worse off, and this violates the principle of mutual advantage.

A scheme is unjust when the higher expectations, one or more of them, are excessive. If these expectations were decreased, the situation of the less favored would be improved.

This is a long book, not only in pages.