Abstract

John Rawls wrote A Theory of Justice partly to provide an alternative to utilitarianism. The dissertation is primarily concerned to evaluate a representative utilitarian criticism of the conception of justice Rawls advances. Chapter One constitutes an introduction to Rawls' theory and also serves to state the focus of the study. After presenting the main outlines of the Rawlsian conception of justice, the reasoning offered in its support is divided into three distinct arguments: the reflective equilibrium argument; the first-order contractarian argument; and the second-order contractarian argument. The focus of the study is the utilitarian criticisms that have been made of the first-order contractarian argument. ;The first-order contractarian argument is divided into three stages and each of the succeeding chapters deals with one of the stages. The criticisms advanced by Holly Smith Goldman, R. M. Hare, and John Harsanyi are examined and evaluated. In the case of each of the three stages, it is argued that the criticisms contain serious flaws and hence fail to undermine Rawls' argument.