论文部分内容阅读
一、基本预设柯恩于2008年出版的《拯救正义与平等》一书试图做两个拯救:一是将均等主义从罗尔斯的差别原则中拯救出来;二是将正义概念从罗尔斯的建构主义正义观中拯救出来。(cf.Cohen,p.2.下引仅标页码)本文主要关注柯恩的第一个拯救。笔者认为,柯恩在这里从运气均等主义的预设入手,对差别原则做了迄今为止最全面、深入甚至最有力的批判。在柯恩看来,差别原则是罗尔斯对运气均等主义与帕累托标准所做的一种妥协,而他的批判表明差别原则所体现的妥协方式存在着内在的动机困境。不过在笔者看来,柯恩的批判只是对差别原则这种特定方式的妥协有效,对妥协本身则并不有效。而帕累托标准存在的问题才是这种妥协本身的真正困境。柯恩设想这种困境的出路在于运气均等
First, the basic default Cohen published in 2008, “Saving Justice and Equality,” a book trying to do two salvos: First, the equal principle from Rawls’s principle of difference; second is the concept of justice from Rohr Sri Lanka’s constructivist concept of justice saved. (cf. Cohen, p.2. Citation Only.) This article focuses on Cohen’s first rescue. The author believes that here Cohen starts from the hypothesis of egalitarianism and has done the most comprehensive, in-depth and even the most powerful critique of the principle of difference to date. According to Cohen, the principle of difference is a compromise between Rawls on the criterion of luck egalitarianism and the Pareto standard, and his critique shows that there are inherent motivational dilemmas in the compromise mode embodied by the principle of difference. However, in the author’s opinion, Cohen’s criticism is only effective in compromise on this particular way of differentiating principles, but not in the compromise itself. The Pareto standard problem is the real predicament of this compromise. Cohn envisioned this predicament the way out of equal luck