In his Rescuing Justice and Equality and a series of early articles,Gerald Cohen famously criticizes John Rawls's theory on justice (especially with regard to the interpretation and application of the difference principle) in terms of the alleged “the incentive argument” These criticisms are not only related to the adequacy of Rawls's general theory,but they also reflect the fundamental difference between Cohen and Rawls regarding their understandings of the nature and aim of egalitarian justiceCohen's attack on Rawls centers on his concept of basic structureThis paper rebuts Cohen's critique of Rawls's argumentIt shows that Rawls's theory stands against Cohen's “correction” or “remoulding” so long as Rawls's construction of his theory and his emphasis on the importance of basic structure and background justice are properly understoodCohen's critique is simply caused by his own misunderstanding of Rawls's theory