Abstract

The article is an analysis of the discussion between Amartya Sen and John Rawls concerning the dispute about the proper space of justice. According to Rawls, the author of the theory of justice as impartiality, primary goods are the basis for defining the proper space of justice (he understands the space of justice as the space of primary goods). On the other hand, in Sen\'s opinion, the basis is constituted by human capabilities (the space of justice as :he space of human capabilities). The basic aim of the article is to analyze the charges made by Sen against the theory of justice as impartiality based on the category of primary goods. After having taken into consideration the difference in the perspectives accepted by the two authors with respect to the problem of justice (Sen is oriented to securing the fate of the poor, whereas Rawls, focusing on obtaining an impartial choice of principles of justice, is concerned about nobody having a privileged position), the approach proposed by Sen was assessed as the more convincing one. This approach allows considering all the information concerning a broadly understood human existence (health, income, climatic, social, political conditions, etc.) when defining just social relations