Overlapping Consensus And Normative Justification Of Justice System

The stability of political order has always been the core topic of political philosophy.But in most cases,it is the most common and effective way to solve the stability problem through consensus.The same is true of Rawls’s thinking about stability.At first,Rawls’s argument on stability in A Theory of Justice did not attract much attention,but after the publication of Political Liberalism,his thinking on stability has attracted much attention in the academic world.Stability is even regarded as the core of his political philosophy.Rawls’s argument for stability can be broadly divided into two parts:firstly,the interpretation of the generation and formation of the sense of justice;secondly,the identification of the priority of the sense of justice.In Political Liberalism,Rawls revised the argument for stability in A Theory of Justice,and overlapping consensus played a more important role in his argument for stability.Although the idea of overlapping consensus is widely disputed,and the concept of overlapping consensus applies only to politics in Political Liberalism,Rawls’s intention to replace the theory of good with overlapping consensus is obvious for solving the priority problem of political concept of justice,and resulting in overlapping consensus plays a more important role in the stability argument.Thus,overlapping consensus plays an increasingly important role in stability argumentation.The stability argumentation process in the two works is contrastively analyzed,I found that the formation process of Rawls by overlapping consensus and support three kinds of paradigm of overlapping consensus,it proved that overlapping consensus is a more abstract,deeper understanding.This consensus allows a pluralistic,incommensurable synthesis of doctrines to maintain different moral foundations,respect for others choose a different life pursue and the way of life,but a consensus on political ideas.Therefore,the normalization of stability by overlapping consensus is realizedHabermas criticizes,however,that Rawls’s overlapping consensus fails to deliver on its promise of value neutrality,and that it is unrealistic to separate political principles and values from the rational environment in which they were conceived.For that matter,In this regard,although the stability argument based on overlapping consensus can be understood as a normative argument,such a normative argument is idealistic.Firstly,the concept of justice at the core of overlapping consensus is politically non-neutral.Next,in theory,the concept of political justice is separated from the comprehensive theory of rationality,but this separation cannot be realized.Therefore,Rawls’ argument on the problem of stability should not only answer the question about the value neutrality of political justice,but also further reflect on the nature of stability,which is a long way to go.The rationality and effectiveness of Rawls’ theory still have great uncertainty.