(Return to main path )

There is a related problem with concrete goods. Rawls talks about goods as though they just appear and the problem is how to divide them up. Tables and chairs and houses and automobiles are like manna from heaven. But they aren't manna from anywhere. They are things that people make. And people have justified claims on things precisely because they make them.

Rawls claims that he bases the Original Position on widely held ideas about justice. Well, I can tell you that one widely held idea about justice is that people have property in the things they make. If Rawls ignores that, he's being extremely selective about so-called widely held attitudes. Perhaps he is selecting or projecting attitudes to get the conclusions he wants?