Research On Amartya Sen's Theory Of Justice

Justice is the basic value of safeguarding human dignity and safeguarding social order.It is of extraordinary significance to the shaping of people's values and behaviors.However,contemporary mainstream justice theory has become difficult to understand.Therefore,we need a new perspective on practical and rational consideration of the issue of justice.Amartya Sen's theory of justice not only provides us with a new perspective on thinking about justice,but also establishes a general framework of reasoning for our thinking.The image of a goddess of justice appeared as early as in ancient Greek mythology.However,rational thinking about justice begins with ancient Greek literature and historical works.Sophocles's "Antigone" and Thucydides'"Peloponnese and Athenian War" are the two sources of justice tradition.Plato and Aristotle laid the foundations for the idealistic tradition of tradition and the tradition of realism,following the path pioneered by their predecessors.In the contemporary era,Rawls's theory of justice responds to Plato's idealist tradition.Sen's theory of justice responds to Aristotle's realist tradition,which also indicates that the division of justice tradition is once again established in contemporary political philosophy.Rawls's theory of justice is an idealism for the political philosophy of the late century,and Sen's theory of justice has a clear realism tendency.In addition to the differences in theoretical inclinations,the difference between Rawls and Sen's justice theory is also reflected in three aspects:From the perspective of the nature of the theory,Rawls's theory of justice is a kind of concept of justice focused on arrangements,and Sen's Justice theory is a kind of justice concept that focuses on reality.Judging from the choice of methodological framework,Rawls' theory adopts the framework of social contract theory,and Sen advocates the comparative framework of social choice theory.Based on the information of justice theory,Rawls' theory is based on basic goodness,and Sen's theory is based on practical ability.From these perspectives,for the contemporary political philosophy represented by Rawls theory,Sen's justice theory may have a revolutionary significance,and domestic and foreign scholars have not yet formed a clear understanding of this.It is not difficult to see from Sen's concept of justice that Sen is a theorist who keeps a close watch on the real world.This can be supported by his comparison of China and India.In Sen's economic theory,he always puts China and India together to compare,and his theory of justice provides a broader perspective for this comparison.Specifically,we can combine Sen's theory with the actual situation of China and India,compare China's and India's socio-economic conditions in terms of development and substantive freedom,market and government roles,and democracy and economic growth.First of all,Sen reminded us of the freedom to look at the development of China and India,not the development of various economic indicators.Of course,this does not mean that economic indicators are not important,but that we should shift our attention from means to purpose.Secondly,the merits of the market mechanism can not neglect the promotion of justice.In particular,the benefits of free trade and job freedom in improving the quality of life are helpful.Sen believes that the government should play an active role in improving people's ability to work and promote justice,such as providing public services in education,health care,and social security.Finally,Sen refuted the fallacy of Lee Kuan Yew's proposition.He believes there is no conflict between democracy and economic development.There is no empirical evidence that the pursuit of economic growth must be at the expense of civil rights.By examining the origins of the justice tradition,the differences between Sen and Rawls's theory of justice,and the practical application of Mori's theory of justice,we can not only form a relatively comprehensive understanding but also obtain some new revelations on the issue of justice.For example,in terms of theoretical goals,Rawls's concept of justice seeks absolute justice,while Sen's concept of justice requires the elimination of obvious injustice;in the focus of theoretical concerns,Rawls's concept of justice concerns institutional arrangements,while Sen The concept of justice is concerned with people's real life;Rawls' concept of justice is limited to the scope of the sovereign state in the scope of application of the theory,and thus is a theory of social justice.However,Sen's concept of justice is marked by globalism and cosmopolitanism.Therefore,it is a global justice theory.