从解释到证成——最优解释方法是否可以充分证成正义理论?

From Explanation to Justification Can inference to the best explanation sufficiently justify a theory of justice?

基础主义和以“反思平衡”为代表的融贯论代表了证成规范性正义理论的主要进路,但它们都存在重要缺陷。“最优解释方法”作为第三种进路被提出,意在为正义理论提供更好的证成。然而,这一方法的效力建立在将事实性真理与规范性理论(主张)未加严格区分的基础之上,并预设了普遍道德真理的存在,但这是缺乏依据的。此外,在该方法中规范性理论的规范性权威何以建立这一问题完全缺席,是一个需要弥补的重大缺陷。

Foundationalism and coherentism as represented by“reflective equilibrium”are the major approaches to justify normative theories of justice,but both face deep difficulties.“Inference to best explanation”is proposed as a third approach,aiming to better justify theories of justice.The efficacy of this method relies on not strictly distinguishing factual truths from normative theories(claims)and it presupposes the existence of universal moral truths,but both are groundless.Furthermore,the issue of establishing normative authority of normative theories is totally absent in this method,leaving a significant defect for remedy.