Saving Equality: G. A. Cohen's Criticism to Rawlsian Difference Principle

DUAN Zhong-qiao

2010-01-01

Abstract:From the egalitarian thesis that in a society which distributive justice prevails,people's material prospects are roughly equal,G.A.Cohen demonstrates that Rawlsian difference principle does not justify incentive-based inequality as a feature of a just society and establish the justice of the inequalities that Rawls thinks are just.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Complex of Theory of Rawls' Education Equity and the Criticism of Its Principle of Methodology

Liu Tongfang

2012-01-01

Educational Research

Abstract:As a principle of methodology , the theory of Rawls' education equity is based on his theory script of justice , and exists insurmountable plight of the theory. The premise of his theory is built on a pure idealistic hypothesis and the understanding of human and human nature , and it is abstract. His perspective of the theory is under the provisions of a uniform scale to promote everyone's fairness and equality , and it is one-sided ; His end-result of the theory is to pursue the maximum consensus of justice of truth on distribution by the tendency of equalitarianism , and it is Utopian. We should take critical views to the theory of Rawls' education equity , be vigilant of the complex of it and prevent the judgment which is not in accord with reality on account of blindly faith.
A Comparative Study of Nozick and Rawls: A Theory of Individual Rights

GONG Qun

2005-01-01

Abstract:In his debate with John Rawls, Nozick raised a theory of justice that contains holding justice, transferring justice, and rectifying justice. He criticized Rawls' distribution theory on the basis of this theory, which demonstrates that the orientation of his theory is individual rights. However, Nozick has totally neglected the importance of equality. Thus, he is not aware of the importance of coordination of justice in social cooperation.
Issues Concerning Rawls

WAN Jun-ren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-7504.2007.01.002

2007-01-01

Abstract:Rawls' Principle of Justice puts forward two principles concerning justice,resulting in the change of research direction in the philosophical circles in America and Europe.Ethics becomes again the focus of philosophical study.However,his principle is also criticized,on the one hand,by liberalists from within,that is,radical liberalists;on the other hand,by those out of liberalist camp,that is,communitarianism and republicanism.This article raises issues concerning the conditions of realizing justice system ignored by Rawls from the perspective of the reality of China.
Two Different Explanations about the Distribution of Justice——Arguments Between Rawls and Nozick

Cui Yan-Qiang,TU Xing-Yong

2006-01-01

Abstract:Regarding the distribution of justice,though both Rawls and Nozick approved the importance of justice,Rawls more emphasized equality.Through the hypothesis of original position and with the aid of the two principles of justice,he relieved the ignorance veil so that the least beneficiary could be compensated and equality obtained.Nozicks thought that the most important question was not equality,but the sacred right.He refuted Rawls' theory of justice distribution through minimal state and with the aid of principle of justice maintenance.Though these two arguments differed greatly,they all concerned about the priority of freedom and equality in the economic domain.The two views revealed the contradiction between freedom and equality in western society,and they were significant in our construction of a harmonious society.
On the Issue of "Social Union" of the Late Years of Rawls and His Social View

YANG Xiao-chang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-7504.2012.06.006

2012-01-01

Abstract:Some communitarianists criticize theory of justice of Rawls for its projection of individual as "a self without any restrains",which leads to a great extent the neglect of his social view and theoretic focus in his late years in academic circle: the issue of "social union".However,Rawls not only regards modern democratic society as a "socially united" society required by the social members due to cooperative urge,but also as a "socially inserted" society in which social form and social history and tradition shape the identity of its member.Against this social view,the deep reason for Rawls to propose the issue of "social union" in his late years comes from the social form of life and tradition resulted from generations of the members' collective political and practical results.
From Principle to Context: Marx versus Nozick and Rawls on Distributive Justice

Xiaoping Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08935690802137720

2008-07-01

Rethinking Marxism

Abstract:The problem of distributive justice has been widely discussed by Western and Chinese scholarship of Marxism. This interest results from the historical transformation of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe at the end of the 1980s, and also from the crucial transition in China beginning in the late 1970s. By conceptualizing the basic principle of distributive justice as “reward according to effort and ability,” this paper discusses the differences between liberal thought, as exemplified by John Rawls and Robert Nozick, and the ideas of Karl Marx, from basic principles to context. It deals with the concept of “private property” or even “private ownership.” In Marx's view, the principle of distributive justice is necessarily betrayed under the condition of private ownership—the capitalist exploits workers—and the solution is the replacement of private by public ownership. Ultimately, the principle of justice is replaced by the principle of beyond justice. Nozick sees private ownership as the natural result of the principle, a condition he regards as self-ownership. Rawls shares this position with Nozick, but seeks to improve its operation with “justice as fairness,” which combines the principle of justice with the principle of beyond justice. Neither Nozick nor Rawls intuits that the principle itself would be betrayed under the condition of private ownership.
The Political Liberalism of Rawls and The Question of Justicial Ark in Pluralistic Times

Bao Limin,Cao Ruitao

2007-01-01

Abstract:Since pluralism is for several reasons becoming a real issue after the second-world war, J. Rawls has adjusted his focus about the problem of justice in his late works-Political liberalism. Thus he has grasped the new developments in the field of political philosophy, and found a new way to solve problems, such as “Tolerating plural value systems and locating the consensus about political justice”. However Rawls’s project of political liberalism has been challenged by many scholars, and there are serious inadequacies that need to be dealt with.
A note on redistributive fairness and economic reform

Anna Rubinchik,Ruqu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2007.10.004

IF: 4.277

2008-01-01

Journal of Development Economics

Abstract:To understand reasons for possible failures of ‘good’ economic reforms, we consider an institution which is always successful in making the best public decision from the utilitarian perspective. We show it is bound to introduce inequality if costs of a reform are privately known: the losers can not be always compensated. Thus, if equity is a primary concern, then some reforms with positive aggregate net gain might not be undertaken. If the utilitarian welfare is the only guide for making public decisions, implementing a reform might require the ability to ignore the associated social costs of inequality.
John Rawls' Principle of Justice and Its Theoretical Significance

Gong Qun

2009-01-01

Abstract:John Rawls' principle of justice is as the outcome of his contract theory.The veil of ignorance as the original point of fairness which is one pre-design is the logic starting point of his theory and from which he drawing out his two principles of justice which is the core of his theory of justice.The first principle of justice asks absolute equity,and the second principle permits inequality in economic fields,if and only if the inequality can benefit the last favored.
Superiority of Socialism over Capitalism Lies in More Equality——G.A.Cohen's Moral Defence of Socialism

Duan Zhongqiao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19862/j.cnki.xsyk.2011.05.006

2011-01-01

Abstract:The future of socialism,especially in the developed capitalist country,has been becoming a subject among Britain and American Marxists after the collapse of the socialist system in the Soviet Union.G.A.Cohen,Oxford University professor,claimed that the realization of socialism must be based on men's willing and the superiority of socialism over capitalism lies in more equality,but classical Marxism did little discussion on both of them.So the socialists now should pay more attention to the moral defence of socialism in order to impel people to join the course of realizing socialism of their own accord.Though Cohen lacks deep understanding of the inevitability of socialism,his thinking of the moral defence of socialism is deserving of use for reference.Because the final realization of socialism cannot be independent of men's subjective efforts,and their subjective efforts are not separated from their moral beliefs.
A Criticism of the Theories of Freedom and Justice

SUN Ying

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-778X.2005.05.005

2005-01-01

Abstract:The theories of freedom and justice by Rawls, Hayek and Nozick equate freedom with justice or equate the principle of freedom with the principle of justice. Based on the premise that the principle of freedom equates the principle of justice, Rawls has reached his principle of social justice, that is, the basic rights are totally equal while other rights are proportionally equal. Based on the same premise, however, Hayek reached another conclusion, that is, social justice is only a subjective illusion that is called “illusion of social justice”. Nozick equates justice with freedom and reaches a wrong conclusion, that is, besides free exchanges, all the principles of social justice are against the principle of freedom because of their standardization.
Three Different Opinions Concerning Distributive Justice： A Discussion with Professor Yao Dazhi

Duan Zhong-qiao

2012-01-01

Abstract:To Professor Yao Dazhi＇s discussion on the distributive justice which appeared in his paper Distributive justice： from the viewpoint of disadvantaged group, this paper proposes three different opinions：（1） The distributive justice involves only how to distribute wealth, opportunity and resource in the people, not that people get continuous improvement in welfare~ （2） A just distribution is egalitarian, an un-egalitarian distribution cannot be regarded as just; （3） The principle of justice is that judges whether a distribution is just, not that determines the balance point between equality and welfare.
The First Principle of Justice and Property-owning Democracy

Lian ZHOU

2015-01-01

Abstract:John Rawls distinguishes five kinds of regime viewed as social systems,complete with their political,economic,and social institutions:(1 )laissez-faire capitalism;(2 )welfare-state capitalism;(3)state socialism with a command economy;(4)property-owning democracy;and finally,(5)liberal (democratic)socialism.He claims that the first three systems violate the two principles of justice in at least one way,and only property-owning democracy and liberal (democratic)socialism satisfy the two principles of j ustice.The j ustification of the thin conception of economic liberties in the first principle of justice is the key to understanding Rawls?s claim.As Jams Nickel and Benjamin Barros suggest, Rawls?s j ustification is not convincing in some aspects,therefore,which of the social systems satisfy the two principles of j ustice remains an open question.
Discussion of the Relationship between Fairness and Efficiency ——Based on Rawls' “A Theory of Justice”

Wenlin Feng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/ret.v4i4.3868

2021-11-25

Review of Educational Theory

Abstract:Since China’s reform and opening up, from the Third Plenary Session of the 14th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China that put forward "efficiency first and fairness" to the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, "first distribution and redistribution must deal with the relationship between fairness and efficiency, and redistribution pays more attention to fairness" Distribution policy, in 2021, the tenth meeting of the Central Finance and Economics Committee clearly stated that it is necessary to promote common prosperity in stages. The relationship between fairness and efficiency has always been the basic principle and standard for the country to formulate policies, and it is also the core issue discussed by scholars. Both utilitarianism and Rawls' two principles of justice provide us with different perspectives to explore the relationship between fairness and efficiency. This article focuses on Rawls's critique of utilitarianism and the specific content of the two justice principles, and makes a simple discussion on the relationship between fairness and efficiency and its enlightenment on the formulation of distribution policies in our country.
Introduction to the Justice Theory of Rawls and Nozick --on the Changes Required to the Philosophical Approach

PENG Cheng-xin

2005-01-01

Abstract:Both Rawls' and Nozick's justice theory use different t heoretical perspective to emphasize individual right. The perplexation which the y faced includes:Firstly, on an ideological perspective, it is entrenched within traditional thought and sticks to a unitary and formulaic concept of the values of subjects. Secondly, on the perspective of institutional design, it misinterp rets the values of subjects. Thirdly, on the psychological perspective, it is sh ort of reliance of subjects. And fourthly, on the ethical perspective, it ignore s natural good of subjects and dislocates natural good from subjects. The articl e concludes its position with the contention that the main point of justice theo ry is not to define what is justice, but to establish a process by which it mayb e justified, society and individuals can achieve agreement on the participation of subjects.
Fragmentary or Comprehensive:Comparative Study of Dewey's and Rawls' Social Governance Theories

Zhang Guoqing,Liu Teng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.2013.04.007

2013-01-01

Abstract:Among the philosophical origins of John Rawls'A Theory of Justice,one figure has always been ignored-W.T.Stace,the doctoral supervisor of Rawls at Princeton.As an expert in mysticism,Hegelian philosophy and moral psychology,Stace is decisive in the formation of Rawls' philosophy.Richard Marius attributed Rawls'loss of faith partly to his intellectual engagement with Stace's essay Man Against Darkness.As Hegel was unwelcomed in western academic world at that time,Rawls'intentional concealing of his relationship with Stace is a manifestation of his attitude towards Hegel.Religion is perceived positively in Dewey's work and plays a pivotal role constructing democratic communities.In contrast,Rawls discards religious elements such as loyalty,universal fraternity and tolerance in designing the principles of justice,his ideal society is based on a wholly new foundation.Dewey advocates a gradually progressive way of reform,following the intellectual line of Locke-Hume-Smith.Education is employed as a main means.Whereas Rawls proposes a radically fundamental social transformation,following the line of Hobbes-Rousseau-Kant-Marx,These two ways may provide some far-reaching insight for China in its social and political reform at a critical turning point.In the process of Chinese social and political reform in the new century,it is of much significance to learn from these two scholars mentioned above while adhering to Marxism.Dewey's gradual approach to social reform might be of a great help in the social construction at grassroots level,whereas John Rawls'theory of justice is valuable in Chinese political reform.Finally,a well-ordered society with democracy,freedom,fairness and justice is what Chinese people really needs today.The major inspiration which can be drawn form these two political philosophers is : political and social reform should accord with the aspiration of people and human nature.
The Theory of Social Justice in Western Contemporary Political Philosophy

GU Su

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-7071.2007.06.009

2007-01-01

Abstract:Equality is the focus of social justice discussed about in the Western contemporary philosophy.Rolls puts forward two principles of justice demanding some benefits given to the people who should not be given on the basis of guaranteeing the wide rights of freedom,but this opinion with somewhat welfare is criticized by Nozick and others who regard the freedom as the highest principle.The latter thinks that equality before starting point and procedure is the only equality.Association followers and radicals refuse to accept the criterion of universal morality and justice.All these disputes provide us with revelation when we discuss about social justice under the market economy.
Rationality and Justice: Textual investigation Based on A Theory of Justice

Yuqian Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7064/33/20240114

2024-05-24

Abstract:Rawls put forward the concepts of "the original state" and "the Veil of ignorance" in his book A Theory of Justice, which made an outstanding contribution to the reconstruction of the social contract theory. On this basis, he demonstrated the combination of the two principles of justice, namely the principle of equal liberty, the principle of equal opportunity and difference principle, which had a strong impact on the long-term mainstream utilitarian view of justice. Based on the textual investigation of A Theory of Justice, this paper starts from the reason basis shared by the two, takes the relationship between reason and justice as a clue, analyzes the differences between Rawls and utilitarianism in moral philosophy and methodology, and explains the connotation of Rawls's two principles of justice in detail. On the other hand, Rawls' systematic recognition and adoption of utilitarianism, as well as the utilitarian characteristics presented in the principle of difference, make the relationship between the two show a complex state of opposition and interwoven. In this paper, Rawls's theory of justice will be deeply explored, and the internal logic of Rawls's thought of justice will be analyzed, so as to further clarify the relationship between reason and justice.
The Ethics of Self-respect and Mutual Respect: From the Mutual Disinterest of Rawls

SUN Xiao-ling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.0257-0289.2012.01.008

2012-01-01

Abstract:Ever since the publication of Rawls magus opus Theory of Justice,his conception of mutualdisinterest,which,according to Rawls,characterizes the artificial person in the original position,hasalways been a moot point.So,we attempted in this essay to clarify the meaning of Rawls' conceptionof mutual disinterest,which finally designates the plurality of the good,as part of the circumstanceof justice.By this means,it is shown that Rawls' interpretation of mutual disinterest,which aims at arejection of egoism charge,has not only distinguished it from the self-interested assumption central tothe traditional contract theories,but also points toward an ethics of self-respect and mutual respect.Suchan ethics would not only make possible a combination of benevolence and justice,but also provides uswith a realistic rendition of Kant's realm of ends.
G.A. Cohen'S Influence on Chinese Academia

Duan Zhongqiao,Li Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18740/s4859g

2012-01-01

Abstract:This research note surveys G.A. Cohen’s influence on Chinese academia by looking at four of his contributions, namely: applying analytical methods in Marxist studies; providing a sober understanding of the relationship between markets and socialism; defending and upholding socialist egalitarianism; and summoning Marxists to engage in moral justification of socialism. Cet note de recherche offre un aperçu de l’importance de G.A. Cohen dans le monde universitaire chinois en regardant quatre de ses contributions:en utilisant des méthodes analytiques dans des études marxistes; en offrant un éclairage sobre des relations entre les marchés et le socialisme; en défendant et en soutenant l’égalitarisme socialiste; et en demandant aux marxistes de s’engager dans les justifications morales du socialisme.

Saving Equality: G. A. Cohen's Criticism to Rawlsian Difference Principle

The Complex of Theory of Rawls' Education Equity and the Criticism of Its Principle of Methodology

A Comparative Study of Nozick and Rawls: A Theory of Individual Rights

Issues Concerning Rawls

Two Different Explanations about the Distribution of Justice——Arguments Between Rawls and Nozick

On the Issue of "Social Union" of the Late Years of Rawls and His Social View

From Principle to Context: Marx versus Nozick and Rawls on Distributive Justice

The Political Liberalism of Rawls and The Question of Justicial Ark in Pluralistic Times

A note on redistributive fairness and economic reform

John Rawls' Principle of Justice and Its Theoretical Significance

Superiority of Socialism over Capitalism Lies in More Equality——G.A.Cohen's Moral Defence of Socialism

A Criticism of the Theories of Freedom and Justice

Three Different Opinions Concerning Distributive Justice： A Discussion with Professor Yao Dazhi

The First Principle of Justice and Property-owning Democracy

Discussion of the Relationship between Fairness and Efficiency ——Based on Rawls' “A Theory of Justice”

Introduction to the Justice Theory of Rawls and Nozick --on the Changes Required to the Philosophical Approach

Fragmentary or Comprehensive:Comparative Study of Dewey's and Rawls' Social Governance Theories

The Theory of Social Justice in Western Contemporary Political Philosophy

Rationality and Justice: Textual investigation Based on A Theory of Justice

The Ethics of Self-respect and Mutual Respect: From the Mutual Disinterest of Rawls

G.A. Cohen'S Influence on Chinese Academia