Relations, Meaning And Interest: The Modes Of Pluralism Justice

Pluralism justice is one of the most important social concerns today, which is also the focus of the contemporary academic debate. This paper mainly studies the principles of distributive justice in the selection criteria of pluralistic society. The multivariate justice is influenced by two factors: the development of pluralism thinking and diversification trend in modern society. On the one hand, pluralism thinking challenges the rational monism in thinking, and Berlin value pluralism also influences the Western researchers in justice. Rawls’ response to pluralism is a political liberalism, emphasizing the value of liberal neutrality to include multiple values, and keeping the model of liberal monism justice. Communitarians choose the multivariate justice to discuss the principles of distributive justice, supporting allocating the goods in accordance with multiple allocation principles. They disagree on the decisive factors: David Miller recognizes that human relations determine the distribution principle, while Walzer thinks that good social meaning determines the allocation principles. In reality, on the other hand, the trend toward multipolarity has become increasingly apparent, and people need to face the differentiation of interpersonal relationships, values and interests, and make use of the principle of diversity to rationalize the distribution of different social resources in many fields. This paper holds that the determinants of multivariate justice allocation can not be decided only from ideological debate, and expounds that interest is the key influential factor of the principle of distribution through the analysis of the nature of a pluralistic society. Such is it in scientific terms: allocation principle works as the dependent variable, and interests are the independent variable, then, social relationships and social significance are intermediary variables.The first part of the paper discusses the philosophical foundation of the pluralism justice theory. Pluralism is a response to and a struggle against the rational monism, which stresses the pluralism of value and requires the tolerant attitude toward differences. It has great influence on the contemporary liberalism, which just emphasizes neutrality and keeps the monism of justice principle. The communitarians’ response to pluralism is to normalize the complex world by multivariate justice principles.The second part discusses the contemporary multiple justice theory of communitarianism. One is about the relational schema in David miller’s theory of multiple justices, and the other is the social significance in Walzer’s model of multivariate justice theory. These two kinds of theoretical model are proposed as the counterparts of the pattern of interest. Miller thinks that social relationships dominate the distribution principles, and the human social relations fall into three categories: united community, instrumental association and citizenship, which correspond to the three distribution principles respectively: need and deserve and equality. Walzer thinks that justice is not only displayed at the time of allocation decision, but the creation, production and distribution of a particular item constitute the value basis of distribution principles. As a result, the social value of the distributed goods determines the different distribution principles, namely, free exchange, need and deserve. Both Miller and Walzer reveal the facts of simultaneous actions taken by different distribution principles in the pluralistic society, break through the state that monism justice principle dominates all distribution areas. The author agrees with the multiple forms in distributive justice principles, through which the complexity of the real world can be essentially understood. But miller’s social relationship model neglected the basis of the interests of the human society, which indicates that interests determine the social relations of the people. Walzer’s social significance model requires that different cultures decide the value of the distributed goods, which, in essence, falls into the trap of relativism. The pluralistic principles of justice are the social ethics, and the understanding of the nature of a pluralistic society becomes a necessary premise to discuss the principle of justice.The third part of the paper discusses the nature of a pluralistic society. The formation of a plural society results from its development from a traditional one to a modern one. The attention on the differences of pluralistic societies originates from people’s reflections on modernity. Therefore, a pluralistic society and modernity are coexistent, but there are inherent tensions between them. Compared with unified social form, the social structure of pluralistic society doesn’t change fundamentally, both determined by the fundamental interests----the economic foundation. Thus, the pluralistic society finds its sources in the pluralism of interests. The diversity in culture, value and relationship of a pluralistic society reflects and represents the development of modern society specifically. The fact that the distribution rule of a pluralistic society face the value conflict in choices, the root of which lies in the fact that conflicts of interests constitutes an important part of modernity predicament. Therefore, the investigation into the modernity becomes necessary to understand the nature of a pluralistic society.Criticism and reflection on the modernity started from Rousseau and reached its peak at Marx. According to Rousseau, human inequality stems from private ownership, and is consolidated in the society. The progress of science, technology and art leads the human from the natural state of freedom and equality to luxury and degraded state. Finally, the inequality is fixed by political and legal system, which increases inequality, gives birth to autocracy, and makes everyone accept slavery equally. Rousseau holds that the social political structures can be reconstructed by social contract so as to build community under the rule of public will, and achieve freedom and equality. Rousseau’s critique of modernity reveals the inherent defects of modern society that reason becomes the highest guiding criterion for people’s behaviors; social system also revolves around protecting individual rights and the pursuit of personal interests, and separates morality and politics at the same time. These characteristics reverse the relation between individuals and society in value order. Rousseau’s critique of the property right is the root of modern social inequality and difference. Marx’s analysis of modernity is most radical. He expounds, with historical materialism, that modernity and development logic is rooted in the logic of capital, which starts modernization by breaking through thinking to pursue economic freedom, political democracy, and freedom and equality of the social life. Modernity changes with the historical development, and demonstrates itself in different forms in different eras. Diversity is displayed in today’s modernity. The advance of modernity is full of twists and turns, but inner drive won’t change and the logic of capitalism still dominates social development in today’s diversified society. Both Rousseau and Marx reveal the influence of property rights and capital as fundamental interests on modernity. Therefore, like in the early period of the development of modern society, the interests are still the determinants of contemporary social relations in a pluralistic society.The fourth part elaborates the multivariate justice framework and its realization. Relations in interests are characterized by unity, difference and contradiction in a pluralistic society, which are involved in the operation of the market economy. However, the market economy cannot completely meet the requirements of justice. It’s imperative that the state, society and individuals be incorporated into justice allocation system to realize the harmonious situation of coexistence of multivariate distributors.