ABSTRACT
Tremendous debates have taken place regarding whether Rawls’ two prin ciples of justice are appropriate or sufficient to account for the basic structure of society. However, most debaters seem to have taken for granted one of the major Rawlsian assumptions: social justice primarily concerns how society distributes primary social goods, such as rights and liberties, power and oppor tunity, and income and wealth. Scholars disagree with Rawls, as well as with each other, regarding which goods should be concerned for distribution and
which way of distribution is just, but few have radically challenged his funda mental starting point that has set the direction of the examination of social justice around the issues of distribution.
