论阿马蒂亚·森比较的正义对罗尔斯公平的正义的价值颠覆  

On the Moral Overthrow of Amartya Sen's Relative Justice to John Rawls' Justice as Fairness

作　　者：丁雪枫[1] DING Xue - feng(School of Maxism,Nanjing Politics Institute, Nanjing 210003 ,China)

机构地区：[1]南京政治学院马克思主义学院,南京210003

出　　处：《理论探讨》2017年第4期69-74,共6页Theoretical Investigation

基　　金：国家重大招标课题"现代伦理学诸理论形态研究"(10&ZD072);南京政治学院"十三五"计划课题"培养‘四有’新一代革命军人研究"(16ZY02-08)阶段性成果

摘　　要：针对罗尔斯公平的正义理论存在探寻完善的正义而轻视现实的正义、关注制度的正确而轻视社会的互动、强调抽象的认同而轻视理论的可行等先验制度主义的价值缺陷,阿马蒂亚·森建构了比较的正义理论,试图以可行能力基础、实质自由原则、幸福标准等价值合理性依据,重塑一种更为合理的正义,以颠覆充满诸多困难的公平的正义。诚然,比较的正义在创新正义理论的同时,很可能将提升正义理论的实践化转向。加强阿马蒂亚·森的正义思想与罗尔斯的正义思想的比较研究,理论上有利于推进社会正义理论尤其作为西方政治哲学名家罗尔斯正义理论研究的全面深入,实践上有利于借鉴西方社会正义理论与实践的探索成果,促进我国社会的公平正义,实现中华民族伟大复兴的中国梦。In Rawls＇ justice as fairness, there is much limitation such as thinking much of the perfect justice but belittling the real - life, of the accurate systems but the commutative society, and of the abstract self - identity but the feasibility of the theory. Amartya Sen establishes his relative justice to overthrow justice as fairness by the base of capability, the rule of matter freedom and the authorization of blessedness. Relative justice boosts the veer of the study of justice while it creates a new theory of justice. It is good to strengthen the relative study of Sen and Rawls＇ justice ideas for pushing the deepening of the theory of western justice and for using for reference its practical fruit. That can promote our justice and the coming true of Chinese Dream.

关 键 词：阿马蒂亚·森 约翰·罗尔斯 比较的正义 公平的正义 

分 类 号：D0-02[政治法律—政治学]