Rawls distinguishes sharply between moral philosophy and moral theory. The distinction is first elaborated in “The Independence of Moral Theory” (1975). Moral theory is concerned with what Rawls calls “substantive moral conceptions.” It subjects these conceptions to philosophical scrutiny to test for rational coherence and their applicability to existing social conditions. While moral theory is an important part of moral philosophy, the latter has a much wider scope that includes epistemological, conceptual, and metaphysical issues as they pertain to morality. The main point of the distinction is to argue that progress can be made in moral theory quite independently of whether advances are achieved in these other areas of inquiry. The target of Rawls’s claim is philosophers who think that epistemological, conceptual, and metaphysical questions need to be answered prior to any advances in our moral understanding. In the history of philosophy, at different times, one of these areas has been assumed to be the foundation of philosophical inquiry that subordinates other philosophical investigations, and subordinates moral inquiry in particular. On the contrary, Rawls thinks that substantial progress in our moral thinking is possible, and moreover that justice as fairness is an example of how this can be achieved.