Against Balancing Of Interest

Starting from Bentham’s utilitarianism, the theory of balancing of interest that focus on the maximization of interests and efficiency became popular in moral philosophy, political philosophy and philosophy of law, and has offered a new account of the idea of justice. In political and social practice, this theory makes use of social policy as a way of settling conflict between individual rights and the public interest. In this regard, interest maximization is a universal standard for optimizing consequences, The assessment of a social policy depends solely on its net social welfare. As a result, utilitarianism and collectivism will dominate public policy-making, because the interests of the majority provide sufficient legitimacy. On the contrary, individual rights is severely crippled by those polices that focus on result by balancing of interest, forming a "majority violence" dilemma. This article defines public interest as "equal opportunity to share" public goods first,then systematically analysis utilitarianism and collectivism’s problems in resolving the conflict between individual rights and public interest. At the same time, this essay uses Dworkin’s egalitarian rights theory, from the view of moral and political philosophy, to criticize utilitarian model and collectivist model of balancing of interest, and claim that the value of equality as an important role in solving the conflict between individual rights and the public interest. This essay re-establish the absolute position of the individual rights in public policy-making, thus unclose the real problems of the model of balancing.