nine of rawls' works in my bibliography and I'm losing my mind at how post-hoc this man is with defining his terms. rawls' method for choosing whether to define his shit or not seems to go something like
rawls: wealth is a primary good :)
everyone with a brain: well, when you say that, you're kind of assuming a certain kind of society will always exist, that is a society that involves private wealth accumulation
rawls: you absolute fools. what I OBVIOUSLY meant by wealth was [obscure definition that is quite far from the common sense meaning of the term]
and then rinse and repeat for every single one of his fundamental ideas. except sometimes it's even worse because he'll say things like "concept and conception actually mean two radically different things from each other" and "oh yeah 'well-ordered' meant something specific when I said it in 1971, but now, in 1993, it means an entirely different specific thing". BITCH and ASSHOLE I do not believe how many people religiously follow every single thing this man has ever said