Key Arguments

• Rawls sets aside surveying the many forms and refinements of utilitarianism because his project is to oppose utilitarianism "generally" rather than any one variant.
• He maintains that "the contrast between the contract view and utilitarianism remains essentially the same in all" versions, so analyzing the strict classical doctrine suffices to bring out the core differences.
• He chooses "the strict classical doctrine" and notes that it "receives perhaps its clearest and most accessible formulation in Sidgwick," using this as the canonical form to be contrasted with justice as fairness.
• He characterizes its main idea as the claim that society is rightly ordered and just when its basic institutions are arranged to maximize "the greatest net balance of satisfaction" across all members.

Source Quotes

I shall not survey these forms here, nor take account of the numerous refinements found in contemporary discussions. My aim is to work out a theory of justice that represents an alternative to utilitarian thought generally and so to all of these different versions of it. I believe that the contrast between the contract view and utilitarianism remains essentially the same in all these cases.

My aim is to work out a theory of justice that represents an alternative to utilitarian thought generally and so to all of these different versions of it. I believe that the contrast between the contract view and utilitarianism remains essentially the same in all these cases. Therefore I shall compare justice as fairness with familiar variants of intuitionism, perfectionism, and utilitarianism in order to bring out the underlying differences in the simplest way.

Therefore I shall compare justice as fairness with familiar variants of intuitionism, perfectionism, and utilitarianism in order to bring out the underlying differences in the simplest way. With this end in mind, the kind of utilitarianism I shall describe here is the strict classical doctrine which receives perhaps its clearest and most accessible formulation in Sidgwick. The main idea is that society is rightly ordered, and therefore just, when its major institutions are arranged so as to achieve the greatest net balance of satisfaction summed over all the individuals belonging to it.

With this end in mind, the kind of utilitarianism I shall describe here is the strict classical doctrine which receives perhaps its clearest and most accessible formulation in Sidgwick. The main idea is that society is rightly ordered, and therefore just, when its major institutions are arranged so as to achieve the greatest net balance of satisfaction summed over all the individuals belonging to it. 16 We may note first that there is, indeed, a way of thinking of society which makes it easy to suppose that the most rational conception of justice is utilitarian.

Key Concepts

• My aim is to work out a theory of justice that represents an alternative to utilitarian thought generally and so to all of these different versions of it.
• I believe that the contrast between the contract view and utilitarianism remains essentially the same in all these cases.
• With this end in mind, the kind of utilitarianism I shall describe here is the strict classical doctrine which receives perhaps its clearest and most accessible formulation in Sidgwick.
• The main idea is that society is rightly ordered, and therefore just, when its major institutions are arranged so as to achieve the greatest net balance of satisfaction summed over all the individuals belonging to it.

Context

Opening of §5, where Rawls announces that he will focus on strict classical utilitarianism (as in Sidgwick) in order to clarify the contrast with his own contractarian conception, justice as fairness.