【摘要】：羅爾斯的公平的正義理論是當代政治哲學(xué)中最重要的正義理論。羅爾斯的理論是以契約論的方法推導(dǎo)的,正義原則實際上是對社會基本善進行分配的原則。然而,立約人只能是具有立約能力的理性人,因而羅爾斯的契約論限制了羅爾斯的正義視域,契約論方法以及理性人的社會合作體系致使其不把先天的殘障人包含在正義問題范圍內(nèi)。阿瑪?shù)賮啞ど?Amartya Sen)和瑪莎·努斯鮑姆(Martha Nussbaum)等人對于羅爾斯的方法論,對資源平等的分配正義問題提出批評,他們突破契約論的局限,提出了能力平等的方法論。他們從人的基本能力的前提出發(fā),將基本善的分配轉(zhuǎn)向能力平等,指出正義在于基本能力的實現(xiàn),而非正義在于基本能力的不足,因此他們從羅爾斯的形式正義轉(zhuǎn)向?qū)嵸|(zhì)性的正義。同時他們也對于契約論不包括殘障人的問題進行了尖銳的批評,羅爾斯回應(yīng)了他們的批評,并仍堅持了自己的觀點。
[Abstract]:Rawls' fair justice theory is the most important justice theory in contemporary political philosophy. Rawls' theory is deduced by contract theory, and the principle of justice is actually the principle of distributing the basic good of society. However, the contractor can only be a rational person with the ability to make a contract, so Rawls' contract theory limits Rawls' vision of justice, the method of contract theory and the social cooperation system of rational people, so that he does not include the innate disabled in the scope of justice. Amatyassen (Amartya Sen) and Martha Nussbaum (Martha Nussbaum) and others criticized Rawls' methodology and criticized the distribution justice of resource equality. They broke through the limitations of contract theory and put forward the methodology of ability equality. Starting from the premise of human basic ability, they turn the distribution of basic good to equal ability, and point out that justice lies in the realization of basic ability, while injustice lies in the deficiency of basic ability. Therefore, they change from Rawls' formal justice to substantive justice. At the same time, they also made sharp criticism of the contract theory, which does not include the disabled. Rawls responded to their criticism and insisted on his own point of view.
【作者單位】： 中國人民大學(xué)哲學(xué)學(xué)院;
【基金】：北京市社會科學(xué)基金重點項目“西方正義倫理思想研究”(14ZXA001)
【分類號】：D0

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 楊豹;;論努斯鮑姆思想中的世界主義[J];社會科學(xué);2012年12期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 中國人民大學(xué)哲學(xué)院 于蓮;可行能力方法具有兩個版本[N];中國社會科學(xué)報;2014年

，

本文編號：2509051