正义之累:罗尔斯与诺齐克之争

On Predicament of Justice:Arguments between Rawls and Nozick

罗尔斯试图建构正义原则,并以此原则为前提建构公平正义社会。其正义两原则既体现其主张的个人享有自由权的绝对性,同时又希望最大化弱势社会群体的利益享有。在诺齐克看来,这致使罗尔斯的两个原则陷入悖论:一方面以优先实现个体自由为条件,另一方面又希望以社会公平为借口关注社会弱势者的利益,致使个体自由难以真正获得。诺齐克认为实现自由的唯一方法就是贯彻正义分配三原则。由此两者分歧明显,并因为这一基本立场的分歧引起了长期的学界争议。

Rawls attempted to construct justice principles and then construct a just society with such principles. His two justice principles reflect the absoluteness of personal rights of freedom and his hope for the maximization of benefit of vulnerable groups. However, in Noziek＇s eyes, Rawls＇ two principles fall into a dilemma. On one hand, they are on the condition of indi- vidual freedom. On the other hand, the vulnerable groups~ interest is cared for on the excuse of social justice. And consequent- ly, it is difficult to aquire individual freedom. Nozick thought the only way to get freedom is to stick to the three just principles allocation. The two masters have obvious divergence and they caused the long argument in academic circle,