Utility Confined By Right: Rawls's Criticism Of Utilitarianism

Every theory has it's basis, including liberalism. But liberalism has different bases, which always conflict. As the base of liberalism, utilitarianism and rights thesis(contractarianism) have special status, which both occupy the center stage of Anglo-American political philosophy and legal philosophy in the long run. But there are intense and striking conflict between them, especially since 1970s when Rawls published his A Theory of Justice, Nozick published his Anarchy, State and Utopia,Dworkin published his Taking Rights Seriously. My paper track to them in the context of the transform of liberal political and legal philosophy from utilitarianism to rights thesis in 1970s in order to advance our understand of Rawls and liberalism.In the history of liberalism, the natural rights theory whose bases are contractarianism and natural law was the tool of early liberal political philosopher to critical despotism and establish liberalism.With the rise of science and the decline of natural law theory, natural law and contractarianism became a myth of politics, right theory became the center of the critic of empiricism to rationalism. Instead of transcendental concept of natural rights, perceived concept of utilitarianism became the center of liberal political and legal philosophy. Utilitarian view that the purpose of life is to pursue happiness and to avoid pain. A behavior which can advance happiness is good behavior and the contrary one is veil.If the main system of a society can make the greatest happiness of most people, this society is good, and therefore just.However, utilitarians have to take seriously the question: why the pursuit of human well-being is more important than the protection of individual rights. Utilitarian gradually recognized this problem and try to place individual rights in the framework of the utilitarianism, but whether Mill or Sidgwick, do not really address this question. This constitutes the article's introduction and first chapter.Rawls firmly grasped the fatal flaw of utilitarianism, continually expand and deepen his critique of utilitarianism with his own theory process , my second chapter and third chapter discusses Rawls's criticism of utilitarianism and different justifications. In the two concepts of rules and justice as fairness,Rawls identified the concept of general rules and practice rules. In the allocation of resources utilitarianism does not take into account the moral relationship between people. After all, utilitarianism make the issue of justice into a management decision problem, similar to a business based on the marginal production of income to determine how many such kind of goods or merchandise, or similar to those in need of a person under the lack of intensity distribution of goods.Rawls' criticism of utilitarianism get it's shape in his A Theory of Justice, which is deepen in his Justice as Fairness-A New Theory of Justic.In his A Theory of Justice,Rawls critize utilitarianism mainly from the point of the relationship of teleology and deontology, the principle of individual choice and social choice.In his A Theory of Justice,utilitarianism ignores the separation of individuals.In his Justice as Fairness-A New Theory of Justic, Rawls critize utilitarianism mainly from the point of stability.He believe that utilitarianism is utilitarianism a comprehensive doctrine,it can not get the voluntary recognition of all the people.I follow Rawls's theory process,discuss Rawls's criticism of utilitarianism in the context of the debate between right and utility,demonstrate his justifications,and give us a base to further our understanding of Rawls's right theory and justice theory,and give us a reference to rethink right research in China.Due to space limitations and my limited personal capacity, I will continue to study these questions in further.