哈耶克对社会正义的批判  

Hayek's Critique of Social Justice

作　　者：曹钦[1] CAO Qin

机构地区：[1]南开大学哲学院,天津300350

出　　处：《西南大学学报（社会科学版）》2019年第2期32-38,195,196,共9页Journal of Southwest University(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目"当代政治哲学中的共和主义理论研究"(16CZX045);项目负责人:曹钦

摘　　要：哈耶克认为,在一个由市场主导的自由社会里,由于没有一个单一的分配者来决定每个人应得的份额,所以"社会正义"或者说"分配正义"是一个毫无意义的词汇。而且,对"社会正义"的追求也是危险的,因为那样将不可避免地使政府压制各种不同的关于正确分配形式的看法,并最终导向全权主义。尽管哈耶克提出了一些令人感兴趣的论证,但他的批判最终是无法成立的。一方面,他难以解释为什么要消解"社会正义"的概念就必须全盘否认正义概念可以用来评价市场体制。另一方面,他对"社会正义"的理解失之狭窄。正义的概念不仅可以用来评价人的行为有意造成的结果,也可以用来评价人们对特定事态的反应。而且,对社会正义的追求并不必然要求不惜一切代价实现它,或者取得所有人对这一概念含义的一致同意。Hayek claims that the term"social justice"or"distributive justice"is meaningless in a free society regulated by market,for there is no single central distributor in such a society.He also claims that the pursuit of this ideal may lead to totalitarianism.There have been many criticisms towards him on this issue,but not all of them are valid.Nevertheless,Hayek s argument has some serious flaws.His denial of the possibility of having a just distribution in market-oriented society seems to be too harsh,especially when compared with the more reasonable view of Nozick.He also fails to understand that standards of justice can be used to evaluate not only states of affairs which are caused by intentional actions,but also the reaction to states of affairs which are not intended by anyone.Moreover,his fear of the prospect of totalitarianism seems to be unwarranted,for pursuing social justice does not require us to do it at whatever costs,or to coerce everybody into reaching a consensus on its meaning.

关 键 词：分配正义 哈耶克 社会正义 自由市场 

分 类 号：B561.59[哲学宗教—外国哲学]