阿玛蒂亚·森的正义观——对罗尔斯的批判及其公共政策含义  

From the Theory of Justice to the Idea of Justice——Sen's Critique on Rawls and the Meaning of Public Policy

作　　者：汪毅霖[1] 

机构地区：[1]大连市委党校经济学教研部,辽宁大连116013

出　　处：《学术月刊》2011年第6期55-62,共8页Academic Monthly

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究一般(青年)项目(10YJC790131);辽宁省社会科学规划基金项目(L10DJL054)的资助

摘　　要：罗尔斯的思考模式并不是理解正义的唯一路径,阿玛蒂亚.森的《正义观》对罗尔斯展开了全面的批判。不同于很多学者忽略替代性理论的完善,阿玛蒂亚.森完成了包括基本主题、分析工具和评估尺度在内的范式转换。他重拾了智识史上的现实比较传统取代主流的先验制度主义,发展了社会选择理论以代替契约论分析构架,以能力尺度超越了基本物品尺度。阿玛蒂亚.森在基本主题和分析工具的学术合法性的证明上是完整和有说服力的,而在将能力方法(作为评估尺度)运用于公共政策领域时则面临了理论逻辑和现实逻辑的限制。只有在理论上退让到"基本能力"层面,能力方法才具有公共政策中的合理性。与罗尔斯的《正义论》一样,阿玛蒂亚.森的《正义观》也不可能是正义研究的终点,两种范式之间的争论方兴未艾。The thought mode of Rawls is not the only pattern to understand justice, Sen initiates a compre- hensive critique on Rawls in the book of ＂The Idea of Justice＂. Don＇t be same with some scholars who ignore the reasonahility of substituted theory, Sen is successful in a transformation of paradigm about foundational question, analysis tool and assessed indicator. Firstly, Sen substitutes dominant approach of transcendental institutionalism with comparative approach; Secondly, Sen replaces the contract as analytic construction with social choice theory; Thirdly, Sen transcends primary goods by capability approach. Sen＇s proof is complete and persuadable on academic legitimacy of foundational question and analysis tool, but Sen fails to resolve the limitation of theory and reality when he tries to use capability approach （as assessed indicator） in the field of public policy. Only on the level of ＂basic capabilities＂, capability approach will have the reasonability of public policy. Just as ＂The Theory of Justice＂ of Rawls, ＂The Idea of Justice＂ is not the end of research, the argument of two paradigms is in the ascendant.

关 键 词：契约 比较 社会选择 能力方法 

分 类 号：B089[哲学宗教—哲学理论]