The Right To A Conception Of The Good Person

Rawls argues for the priority of the right to a conception of the good person (Rawls, 1766). The priority of the self to its ends supports the priority of the right to the good. People are free and equal; they are ascribed two moral powers connected “with the elements in the idea of social cooperation; namely a capacity of a sense of justice and a capacity for [the] conception of the good” (Rawls, 233). A sense of justice is the capacity to understand justice and cooperate, and the capacity for a conception of the good is the capacity to rationally “pursue a conception of one's rational advantage” (Rawls, 233). Therefore, cooperation is important to a just society, and it should be embedded in the public culture. For a genuine appeal of the scheme of fair cooperation the rules have to be public (to avoid lies for a well-ordered society), reciprocated (each should benefit), and each person should be able to pursue her ends. …show more content…
Regardless what one’s culture or religious framework might be, there is a communality that allows us to have the capacity for justice that can be differentiated from our personal capacity for the good. If we can agree on the moral structure of notions of freedom and equality and cooperation, then we can agree on the basic structure of a democratic society. If we agree with Rawls on the concept of person in a non-metaphysical way and the person can grasp what the fair terms of cooperation are and abide by them, then we can have a minimal conception of society. The capacity of the conception of the good does not require that we engage in sophisticated moral thinking, but it requires the capacity to evaluate this scheme as fair (or