罗尔斯正义理论中的“稳定性问题”

“The Problem of Stability” In Rawls’ Theory of Justice

“稳定性问题”是罗尔斯正义理论中一个非常重要的问题,其追问的是特定的正当理论或政治制度的实际可行性,及其是否能够衍生出足够的自我维系的力量。“稳定性问题”至少有三种模式:霍布斯模式、密尔模式、罗尔斯模式。霍布斯关注的是单纯的稳定性,并把稳定性作为衡量政治制度的至高无上的标准,完全不顾及衡量政治制度的其他标准。密尔对功利主义理论稳定性的考察,并没有提出适用于该理论的独特的稳定性力量。罗尔斯的稳定性模式与霍布斯和密尔截然不同,关注的是良序社会的稳定性,是出于正当理由的稳定性,其核心指向的是正当与善的融合性论证,其论证的关键在于阐明正义之善,但他的稳定性考察也存在着缺陷,没有说明应该如何权衡稳定性与道德理论建构的其他标准。

＂The problem of stability＂ is a very important problem of Rawls＇ theory of justice. This problem asks the practical feasibility of particular theory of right or political system, that is, whether particular theory of right or political system can engender sufficient self-supporting strengths. We at least can distinguish three models of ＂the problem of stability＂, namely Hobbes model, Mill model, and Rawls model. Hobbes paid attention to pure stability, he regarded stability as the sovereign standard which was used to evaluate political system, and did not take into account other standards at all. Mill＇s characterization of the stability of utilitarianism did not put forward distinctive stability strengths which were applicable to utilitarianism only. Rawls＇ model differs from Hobbes and Mill completely. Rawls concerned the stability of well-ordered societies and stability for the right reasons. The core of Rawls＇ exposition of ＂the Problem of Stability＂ points to the argument of the congruence between right and good. The key of the congruence argument lies in elucidating the good of justice. His examination of ＂the problem of justice＂ also have drawbacks, he did not tell us how to balance the criterion of stability and other criteria concerning the con- struction of moral theory.