理想主义VS现实主义:西方正义传统的起源、确立及当代回应——以罗尔斯与阿玛蒂亚·森的正义论比较为契机  

Idealism vs.Realism:Origin,Establishment,and Contemporary Response of the Western Justice Tradition——Based on the Comparison of Rawls’s and Amartya Sen’s Theory of Justice

作　　者：王强 宋宽锋 WANG Qiang;SONG Kuan-feng(School of Philosophy and Government Administration,Shaanxi Normal University,Xi’an 710119,China)

机构地区：[1]陕西师范大学哲学与政府管理学院,陕西西安710119

出　　处：《榆林学院学报》2023年第1期50-55,共6页Journal of Yulin University

摘　　要：在西方思想史上,人们对于正义的思考始终占据着突出地位。如何避免正义观念陷入先验主义和取消主义的困境也是一个值得深思的问题,而系统比较法对于这个问题的解答不仅是有效的而且是有益的。索福克勒斯和修昔底德是古希腊人对正义进行理性反思的早期代表,他们的著作分别是正义的理想主义传统和现实主义传统的起源。柏拉图和亚里士多德沿着前辈开辟的道路,分别为正义观念的两种传统奠定了基础。在当代政治哲学中,罗尔斯的正义理论回应了柏拉图的正义观,森的正义理论则回应了亚里士多德的正义观。西方正义观念的这两种传统在研究方式和理论内涵上具有较为明显的差异性,但在同一个传统内部确有某种相似性。In the history of Western thought,pe2ople’s thinking about justice has always occupied a prominent position.How to avoid the dilemma of transcendentalism and liquidationism in the notion of justice is also a question worth pondering,and the systematic comparative method of answering this problem is not only effective but also useful.Sophocles and Thucydides are early representatives of the ancient Greeks’rational reflection on justice,and their writings are the origins of the idealistic and realist traditions of justice respectively.Plato and Aristotle followed the path of their predecessors,laying the foundations for two traditions of the idea of justice respectively.In contemporary political philosophy,Rawls’s theory of justice responds to Plato’s conception of justice,and Sen’s theory of justice responds to Aristotle’s conception of justice.These two traditions of the Western concept of justice have obvious differences in research methods and theoretical connotations,but there are some similarities within the same tradition.

关 键 词：正义观念 理想主义 现实主义 

分 类 号：B82-02[哲学宗教—伦理学]