平等如何能够加以证明? 被引量：5

How could Equality be Justified?

导出

摘要从直觉上接受平等主义,这很容易;在理论上证明平等主义,这很困难。当代的平等主义者为平等提供了四种主要的论证:基于尊严的论证依赖于一种人性的形而上学,从人的尊严推论出人的平等;基于程序的论证主张,不平等需要理由,平等则不需要理由;基于于公平的论证认为,保证平等的东西是公平,而保证公平的东西是某种理论假设(原初状态或公正动机);与上述三种论证相比,基于契约主义的论证更有道理,它用所有人的同意来证明平等。但是,这四种论证各自都面临一些难以解决的问题。 It is easy to embrace equalitarianism intuitively, but it is quite difficult to justify the theory of equality. How could Equality be justified？ Contemporary equalitarian proposes four basic justifica- tions： the justification based on dignity relies on a metaphysics of human nature, which deduces the equality of a person from the dignity of human beings; the justification based on procedure maintains that inequality needs reasons, while equality does not need reasons; for the justification based on fair- ness, equality depends on fairness that depends on some theoretical hypothesis （the original position or the motive of impartiality）. Compared with the afore-mentioned justifications, the contractualist justification is more reasonable, which appeals to the consent of all persons for equality. However, each of the four justifications has some difficulties that are hard to overcome.

作者姚大志

机构地区吉林大学哲学基础理论研究中心暨哲学社会学院

出处《中国人民大学学报》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第3期39-46,共8页 Journal of Renmin University of China

基金教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目"分配正义研究"(12JJD710011)

关键词平等尊严公平正义 equality dignity fairness justice

分类号 D081 [政治法律—政治学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献14

1Bernard Williams. "The Idea of Equality". In Philosophy, Politics, and Society, Series ]][ , Basil Blackwell, 1962.
2John Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999.
3Nicholas Mark Smith. Basic Equality and Discrimination. Surrey, UK: Ashgate, 2011.
4Bernard Williams. "The Idea of Equality". In Philosophy, Politics, and Society, Series II (Basil Blackwell, 1962).
5David Miller. "Arguments of Equality". In Peter French et al (ed.). Midwest Studies in Philosophy: Vg. Social and Political Philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1982.
6Isaiah Berlin. "Equality". In Peter Vallentyne (ed.). Equality and Justice. Volume 2. New York: Routledge, 2003.
7Donald Dworkin. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1977.
8J. R. Lucas. "Against Equality". Philosophy, 1965 (40).
9Stanley I. Benn. "Egualitarianism and the Equal Consideration oI Interests". In J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman (ed.). Nomos 1X Equality. New York.. New York University Press, 1967.
10Thomas Nagel. Equality and Partiality. New York.. Oxford University Press, 1991.

共引文献1

1王立.应得与责任——基于道德主体视角的分析[J].社会科学辑刊,2016(4):187-192. 被引量：2

同被引文献17

1) See Isaiah Berlin, " Equality, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society", 56 New Series ( 1955 - 1956 ) , pp. 301 - 326.
2See R. M. Hare, Moral Think, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 19gl, pp. 107 -116.
3See Bertrand Russell, On Denoting, 14 Mind (1905) , pp. 479 -493.
4See G. E Moore, "Proof of an External World", 25 Proceedings of the British Academy ( 1939 ), pp. 273 - 300.
5Russ Shafer-Landau, Moral Realism a Defence, Oxford : Clarendon Press, 2003, p. 247.
6Russ Shafer-Landau, Moral Realism: A Defence, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2003, p. 241.
7Derek Parfit, On What Matters Vol. 2, Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 486.
8Ibid., pp. 475 -487.
9See Joseph Raz, Engaging Reason On the Theory of Value and Action, Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 67 -90.
10Matthew Kramer, Moral Realism as a Moral Doctrine, Wiley-Blackwe11, 2009, p. 160.