正义原则的证明问题

How to Justify Principles of Justice

罗尔斯假定,在原初状态下,自由平等的道德-理性人置身于无知之幕背后,经过广泛的协调讨论,做出理性选择,把公平正义接受为最合理的实质性正义原则,于是正义原则得到了确立。针对这一证明策略,批评者质疑正义原则的真实性和有效性,质疑两个正义原则的兼容性,批评差别原则的模糊性及其调节对象社会基本益品的任意性。原始契约不是真契约,公平正义观只是一种个人主张,不具有权威性。罗尔斯把有待证明的原则当作绝对命令,导致正义原则的"证明/接受悖谬"。正义原则证明在政治哲学中占据着核心位置。考察正义原则的证明问题,探索正义原则证明的政治学或经济学路径,推进罗尔斯之后的正义理论研究,是当前政治哲学的重要任务。从哲学证明走向科学证明,是正义原则证明的新方向,跨学科研究将为这个新方向提供可能性。

John Rawls assumes that in the original state, the free, equal, moral and rational people would stand behind the veil of ignorance, after extensive consultation and discussion, make a rational choice to accept the principle of justice as fairness as the most reasonable one. Then, that principle has been established. For this justifieaion strategy, critics quest its authenticity and validity. When people take the principle of justice as the original contract, it is not a real contract. As Rawls＇ s conception of justice as fairness is just a personal opinion, not an authoritative principle, Rawls has to confront the ＂justification/acceptance paradox＇of his conception on the principles of justice. The principles of justice is the core of Rawls political philosophy. It is an important task of the current political philosophy to study the following issue, how should we justify the principles of justice, and to explore the potantial paths from political sciences or economics to those principles, and to promote the theory of justice after Rawls. And it will be a new direction to prove those principles in light of not a philosophical justification but a scientific one.