Bienes sociales primarios versus utilidad

in the present paper i argue that the specific arguments developed by john rawls to justify the standard of social primary goods do not succeed. in the first place i develop and criticize the rawlsian arguments grounded in antidiscriminatory intuitions and the fact of reasonable pluralism. i also characterize and criticize rawls's ideas concerning the scope of the concept of fairness as well as his argument concerning extensive tastes and responsibility for ends. i believe that they do not justify a resourcist distribuendum. on the contrary, i argue that such considerations support a welfarist standard. the reason is that a welfarist standard successfully deals with the difficulties rawls mentions in favoring the resourcist standard of social primary goods.