Font Size: a A A

Reason And Justice - Rawls "a Theory Of Justice" Research

Posted on:2005-04-27Degree:DoctorType:Dissertation
Country:ChinaCandidate:S B YinFull Text:PDF
GTID:1116360125467460Subject:Foreign philosophy
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
With respect to the moral norm for which Rawls argues, his theory of justice has two features: to begin with, it insists that consideration of basic liberties should be prior to that of economic and social advantages; secondly, it insists that economic and social advantages could be distributed unequally, but ought to be to the greatest benefit of the most disadvantaged in social cooperation. As a strategy of argument, it is through contrasting his two principles of justice with the principle of utilitarianism that these features are displayed. In the ideal-reason justification, Rawls constructs a argument device called "original position", in this hypothetical position, Rawls argues, in contrast with other alternatives, the two principles of justice as fairness will be chose by the rational parties. Next, in justifying of the application of two principles, which Rawls divides into three stages (constitution, legislature and individual duty and obligation), Rawls also claims that the two principles is competent, and has some merits that the principle of utilitarianism has not.The relation between right and good are important question of moral philosophy, in dealing with this question, Rawls argues his two principles of justice is more consistent with person' s good than the principle of utilitarianism. The principle of utility doesn't rule out the probability of sacrificing some persons' interests for others in the balance of total social utility. As a moral requirement, it is supererogatory. In some conditions, it will encourage hatred of self. From the view of moral psychological law, due to the consistency between the two principle of justice and good, Rawls think that one who grows up in a society, which governed by the principles of justice as fairness, will get a sense of justice in the maturity of their intelligence and body.The stability of a just institution requires the support of sense of justice. A society getting the strong support of the general sense of justice, is a well-ordered society, in the words of Humboldt, it is a union of social unions. A well-ordered society has a kind of stability that the society governed by the principle of utilitarianism cannot touch.In my dissertation the above contents are arranged into chapter II, in chapter I, I place the concept of justice in the history of western philosophy, several conceptions of justice are considered. Obviously, those considerations are incomplete, but mypurpose is not for completeness, I only want to show that justice as fairness is only one of the many conceptions of justice. These two chapters constitute the first part of my dissertation ("history and theory"). The second part, also the last, consists of four chapters ("dialogue and criticism"), namely, the third to the sixth chapter of this dissertation.In the third chapter, the distinctions between "liberty", and "basic liberty", and the problem of the priority of basic liberty are discussed. From Hart's challenge on Rawls, I argued that that Rawls has some questions in dealing the two questions.The fourth chapter is concerned with Nozick's challenge on Rawls "difference principle". Nozick argues that different principle is not symmetrical, when Rawls justifies it to the more advantaged and the less advantaged. In treating people's natural talents as "common assets", it seems that difference principle violates individual rights, which Rawls trying to avoid. I think the first point of Nozick's is right, but the second is mistaken.The fifth chapter is concerned with problems of meta-ethics. It mainly deals with the meaning of primacy of justice in Rawls' philosophy, and the problem whether in his conception moral subject is individualized in advance, and has the capability of choice only, no capability of recognition. I argue they are mistaken, the meaning of the primacy of justice in Rawl's theory is not the same as Sandel says; and the moral subject in Rawls' sense, is of capability of choice and recognition both.The sixth and last chapter is concerned with the question wh...
Keywords/Search Tags:Rawls, justice, priority of liberty, difference principle, subject of possession, global justice
PDF Full Text Request
Related items