Two Rational Paradigm Concept Of Justice

Western Marxists have critically made a comparison between John Rawls'theory of justice and Marx's in the round, since A Theory of Justice was published in 1971. Most of the issues discussed, however, have limited within the scope of theory of justice itself, and paid no attention to thinking paradigm and methodology that shape these theories. The paper is the work based on corresponding the history of philosophy from this angle. It will show that western paradigm of reason had consisted of two directions of development—theoretical and practical reason, since it was built systematically by Aristotle in ancient greece. Practical reason has also consisted of two directions—practical reason in real life and theoretical'practical reason'. Though the later seem to be put on an important place of their philosophy, it is still a episteme of'practical reason', viz., it is a metaphysics deduced from hypothesis or self‐evident premise. They cannot transfer their theories into practice in real life, because the hypothesis or premise cannot be necessarily connected with the object they want to achieve. In modern philosophy, theoretical'practical reason'was originated from Kant's'practice of pure reason', and ended as Hegel's'philosophy of spiritual practice'. And Marx carved out a new way—real practical reason. On this horizon, Rawls'theory of justice is viewed as a kind of Kant's metaphysics, and on the domain of critique of Marx's historical materialism also, though he was a contemporary philosopher who set up his theory on the shoulders of some great predecessors. The paper believes, therefore, that we should notice the relation of the premises of Rawls'theory of justice and China's realities, and the realistic foundations of achievement of his conclusions, and the historical background that his theory had a widespread effect on the western philosophy, when it is applied to China's realities. On this precondition, some of theories of justice, or distributive theories of the western philosophy have some significance to us in the process of income distribution reform. We believe that, however, Marx's historical materialism should hold the leading role. It is only one able to provide the instructive frame of empirical scientific analysis, and able to help us find a way to reform income distribution in conformity with China's realities.