John Rawls argues, in his renowned book A Theory of Justice, that the concept of right is prior to the concept of the good. It seems the underlying idea is that he takes the diversity of comprehensive philosophical or moral doctrines as an enduring fact of the public culture of the contemporary constitutional democracy. Therefore, he attempts to construct his conception of juctice without presupposing any particular comprehensive ideal of the good. This article tries to show that Rawls does assume a controversial conception of the good, namely, the individualistic ideal of the person, as one of premises in developing his theory of justice. In other words, Rawls cannot consistently holds the priority of right over the good.