Liberal EqualityI. Rawls Projecta. Intuitionism and utilitarianismi. Most of thepolitical philosophywritteninthelast 3yearshasbeenonthequestion of which ri!hts and liberties to protect.ii. "ohn Rawls presented an alternati#e to utilitarianism in his $%&$ boo' A Theoryof Justice.$. Political theorywascau!ht betweentwoe(tremes) utilitarianismandintuitionism*anincoherent jumbleof ideasandprinciples+ aseriesofanecdotes based on particular intuitions about particular issuesa. Intuitionismisanunsatisfyin! alternati#e to utilitarianism, foritdoes not !o beyond and ma'e sense of the particular intuitionsb. Intuitionist theories ha#e two features)i. - pluralityof first principleswhichmayconflict to!i#econtrary directi#es in particular types of casesii. .o e(plicit method, no priority rules, for wei!hin! theseprinciples a!ainst one another$. Priorityrulesarethou!ht tobetri#ial, ha#enosubstantial assistance in reachin! a jud!mentc. /here are many 'inds of intuitionism *distin!uishable by the le#elof !enerality of their principles)i. 0ommon sense intuitionism$. /a'es the formof !roups of rather specificprecepts1. Each!roupappliestoaparticular problemofjustice3. In arri#in! on one such notion, one must balancesomehow #arious competin! criteria2. .o one presumably would decide by any one ofthese precepts alone+ compromise betweenthem must be struc'd. /he#ariousprinciplescanalsobeof amuchmore!eneralnaturei. /husit iscommonfor peopletotal'about intuiti#elybalancin!, for e(ample, equality and liberty$. /hese principles would apply to the entire ran!eof a theory of justicee. /heseintuitionist approaches *either onthele#el of specificprecepts or !eneral principles3 are)i. /heoretically unsatisfyin!ii. 4uite unhelpful in practical mattersf. Intuitionist approaches !i#e no !uidance when specific andirreducible precepts conflicti. 5hen they conflict, we loo' to political theory for!uidance1. /he tas' of Rawls) to de#elop a systematic political theory that structuresour different intuitionsa. 6e does not assume that such theory e(ists, but it is worth tryin!to find one3. Rawlshasacertainhistorical importanceinbrea'in!theintuitionism7utilitarianism deadloc'2. 6is theory dominated the field because later theorists definedthemsel#es in opposition to Rawlsa. 8y contrastin! themsel#es with Rawls theory, they e(plain theirtheories.b. /o ma'e sense of later wor's of justice is to understand Rawlsb. /he principles of justicei. Rawls idea$. 9eneral conception of justice) -ll social primary !oods:liberty andopportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self7respect:are to bedistributed equally unless and unequal distribution of any or all of these!oods is to the ad#anta!e of the least fa#oreda. /he idea of justice is tied to an equal share of social !oodsi. Important twist) 5e treat people as equals not byremo#in! all inequalities, but only those whichdisad#anta!e someone$$. Inequalities are allowed if they impro#e my initialequalshare. .ot allowed, as in utilitarianism, ifthey in#ade my fair share1b. /his is not yet a full theory of justicei. /he#arious!oodsbein!distributedaccordin!tothatprinciple may conflictii. 5eneed a systemof priority amon!st the differentelements in theory$. Rawls solution) brea'in! down the !eneralconceptionofjustice intothree parts,arran!edaccordin! to the principle of ;le(ical priority1.