ABSTRACT
This chapter clarifies the nature and sources of the disagreement between democratic capitalists and non-Marxian socialists concerning the relative importance of effort as against successful contribution in determining an ideally just distribution of goods in society. It then shows why disagreement about the relative importance of effort and success in determining what one deserves from society very naturally arises and remains impossible to resolve in a way that will satisfy everyone. Then it will be argued that an appropriate notion of desert is centrally involved in the concept of justice, despite John Rawls's notable recent attempts to discredit such an idea. Society is conceived as a kind of agent that people benefit or try to benefit, that people can deserve more or less from according to their contributions or efforts, and that rewards and punishes. The analysis of justice offered here is not quite so trivial as all this, however, even if only because of its emphasis on free consent.
