批判视野下罗尔斯和森的分配正义理论之比较

发布时间：2019-03-12 13:19

【摘要】：本文围绕约翰·罗尔斯和阿马蒂亚·森关于分配正义理论中基本善和可行能力的争论而展开,认为森的分配正义理论采取一种面向实际的现实研究方法,着眼于现实的对比,因而更具合理性;二者理论的相同点表现在避免了效用比较问题、对非收入因素的关注、对弱势群体的关注和重视异质个体的多样性特征,不同点表现在对于自由追求标准不同、比较指标范围不同、差别原则适用对象不同和理论所要达到的目的不同。以马克思辩证法思想为指导对两者理论进行哲学批判,并综合二者的互补性从分配制度和政策上探索有效治理中国贫富差距问题的对策更具有合理性。
[Abstract]:This paper focuses on the debate between John Rawls and Amartya on the basic good and feasible ability in the theory of distributive justice, and thinks that Sen's theory of distributive justice takes a practical approach to reality research, focusing on the contrast of reality. Therefore, it is more reasonable; The similarities of the two theories show that they avoid the problem of utility comparison, pay attention to the non-income factors, pay attention to the vulnerable groups and attach importance to the diversity characteristics of heterogeneous individuals, and the different points are expressed in the different standards for the pursuit of freedom. The scope of comparison index is different, the applicable object of the principle of difference is different and the purpose of the theory is different. Under the guidance of Marx's dialectics, it is more reasonable to make philosophical criticism on the two theories, and to explore the countermeasures to effectively manage the gap between rich and poor in China from the perspective of distribution system and policy by integrating the complementarities of the two theories.
【作者单位】：东北财经大学马克思主义学院;东北财经大学经济学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金重大项目“社会主义与市场经济深度融合研究”,项目编号:2015YZD08 辽宁省马克思主义学院重大研究方向立项课题“习近平治国理政经济战略思想研究”,项目编号:L15ZDA003
【分类号】：F091.3

【相似文献】