Rawls versus the Utilitarian This very simple example illustrates why Rawls and the Utilitarian hold substantially different views about justice. Consider distribution of Goods to 3 individuals, A, B, C This example could easily be extended to consider more individual. Distribution 1 Distribution 2 Distribution 3 A 100 100 90 B 100 150 110 C 100 110 500 Net 300 450 700 Both Rawls and the Utilitarian prefer #2 to #1. The Net total is greater, and each individual A, B, C benefits So, by the second principle, #2 preferred to #1. Compare #3 and #1. For the Utilitarian, #3 preferred. The Net greater. But nor for Rawls. Comparing #3 with #1, individual A receives less. And we are not justified in sacrificing one individual's interests to benefit the community in this way. A similar argument shows that the Utilitarian prefers #3 to #2, but Rawls does not. Here 2 intuitive approaches really give different conclusions. We must, therefore, find some way to choose between Rawls' position, and that of the utilitarian.