Key Arguments

• He states that "These principles are to be arranged in a serial order with the first principle prior to the second," indicating a strict hierarchy rather than a balancing approach.
• He explains the consequence of this ordering: "a departure from the institutions of equal liberty required by the first principle cannot be justified by, or compensated for, by greater social and economic advantages," explicitly rejecting trade‑offs of basic liberties for material gains.
• He notes that the distribution of wealth, income, and hierarchies of authority "must be consistent with both the liberties of equal citizenship and equality of opportunity," so any design of inequalities is constrained by fully honoring the first principle.
• He contrasts this with the general conception of justice, which "imposes no restrictions on what sort of inequalities are permissible; it only requires that everyone’s position be improved," admitting that under that conception even giving up some fundamental liberties for gains is theoretically possible.
• He emphasizes that the two principles "do not permit exchanges between basic liberties and economic and social gains," presenting this as a defining feature of the special conception he will focus on.
• He interprets the serial ordering as expressing "an underlying preference among primary social goods" and holds that "When this preference is rational so likewise is the choice of these principles in this order," thereby offering a rational justification for the lexical priority of liberty.
• He acknowledges that this ranking "appears extreme and too special a case" but hints at further justification later (§82), indicating that this is a deliberate, argued choice rather than an ad hoc constraint.

Source Quotes

One applies the second principle by holding positions open, and then, subject to this constraint, arranges social and economic inequalities so that everyone benefits. These principles are to be arranged in a serial order with the first principle prior to the second. This ordering means that a departure from the institutions of equal liberty required by the first principle cannot be justified by, or compensated for, by greater social and economic advantages.

These principles are to be arranged in a serial order with the first principle prior to the second. This ordering means that a departure from the institutions of equal liberty required by the first principle cannot be justified by, or compensated for, by greater social and economic advantages. The distribution of wealth and income, and the hierarchies of authority, must be consistent with both the liberties of equal citizenship and equality of opportunity.

This ordering means that a departure from the institutions of equal liberty required by the first principle cannot be justified by, or compensated for, by greater social and economic advantages. The distribution of wealth and income, and the hierarchies of authority, must be consistent with both the liberties of equal citizenship and equality of opportunity. It is clear that these principles are rather specific in their content, and their acceptance rests on certain assumptions that I must eventually try to explain and justify.

Imagine instead that men forego certain political rights when the economic returns are significant and their capacity to influence the course of policy by the exercise of these rights would be marginal in any case. It is this kind of exchange which the two principles as stated rule out; being arranged in serial order they do not permit exchanges between basic liberties and economic and social gains. The serial ordering of principles expresses an underlying preference among primary social goods.

It is this kind of exchange which the two principles as stated rule out; being arranged in serial order they do not permit exchanges between basic liberties and economic and social gains. The serial ordering of principles expresses an underlying preference among primary social goods. When this preference is rational so likewise is the choice of these principles in this order.

Key Concepts

• These principles are to be arranged in a serial order with the first principle prior to the second.
• This ordering means that a departure from the institutions of equal liberty required by the first principle cannot be justified by, or compensated for, by greater social and economic advantages.
• The distribution of wealth and income, and the hierarchies of authority, must be consistent with both the liberties of equal citizenship and equality of opportunity.
• It is this kind of exchange which the two principles as stated rule out; being arranged in serial order they do not permit exchanges between basic liberties and economic and social gains.
• The serial ordering of principles expresses an underlying preference among primary social goods.

Context

Rawls draws out one of the most distinctive structural features of his view: the lexical priority of the liberty principle over the principle governing social and economic inequalities.