论罗尔斯的正义战争观

罗尔斯在正义战争传统的基础上探讨了开战正义和战时正义,并补充了战后正义.罗尔斯的正义战争观和其社会正义理论有密切的联系,并且深受沃尔泽正义战争思想的影响,但又与其有所不同.罗尔斯的正义战争观也存在理论上的困境,为今后的正义战争研究指明了方向.     

西方正义理念的历史回眸

正义是人类社会追求的现实目标和永恒理想。在西方文化史上,蕴藏着丰富而深厚的正义思想,它们构成了西方绵延古今的正义观变迁史。真正的正义理论应该是对人类生存,发展与完善这一中心问题的思考与表达。这一理解即是我们正确评价西方各种正义观的出发点,也是我们科学合理地建构中国社会转型期正义理论的立足点。     

罗尔斯的代际正义论:一种融贯解释的尝试

代际正义理论是当代道德哲学和政治哲学中的重要理论之一,约翰·罗尔斯的代际正义理论在当代有关代际正义理论的研究中处于重要地位。罗尔斯并不主张将其差别原则直接用于处理代际问题,而是建构了一种以"正义的储存原则"为内核的代际正义理论。不少论者认为,罗尔斯的代际正义理论与其差别原则之间存在一种张力,他在其后期著作中修正了自己的观点,始终坚守"当下时间进入解释",但放弃了其起初坚持的"家族模式的动机假设"。实际上,不少批评者误解了罗尔斯的代际正义理论,其代际正义理论能够获得一种融贯的解释。     

经济正义:当代伦理学面临的重大课题

正义是一个历史范畴。人类对正义的追求经历了一个由个人正义到社会正义、由政治正义到经济正义的过程。随着经济关系成为支配社会发展的主要力量,经济发展的单向度价值取向的危害日益严重,社会不公正现象在经济领域中日益凸现,经济正义已成为当代社会正义理论中最重要、最具有社会意义的内容和形式。     

论马克思正义观的基本主张

按照列奥.施特劳斯的考证,在马克思之前出现了古典正义观和自由主义正义观两种大的类型的正义观。古典正义理论和自由主义正义理论之间存在着明显的差别,比如,古典正义观强调共同体高于个体,预设了一个神圣实体的存在,强调义务优先于权利,强调基于伦理的必然性的自由,强调一种普遍性的公共善和强调公正是城邦立法的第一美德;自由主义正义观则强调个体优先于共同体,强调权利     

从实体正义到程序正义:卢梭与罗尔斯契约正义观之比较

卢梭的契约正义观与罗尔斯的契约正义观在形式上有其相似之处。但由于他们各自所处的时代背景不同,其正义观的价值内核、论证方式及其实现途径都存在着重大的差别。从卢梭的契约正义观到罗尔斯的契约正义观的嬗变代表了西方正义论从实体正义向程序正义的转变,把握这一转变的趋向及其内在精神实质,对于丰富和完善当代中国和谐社会建设的理论和实践是大有裨益的。     

经济正义与环境正义——转型期我国城乡关系的伦理之维

转型期我国城乡关系出现了一系列新的矛盾和问题,突出表现在:城乡二元经济结构仍然存在,城乡环境也呈现出“城市环境好转,农村环境恶化”的二元趋势.马克思主义经典作家建立在唯物史观基础上的经济正义思想,功利主义以“最大多数人的最大幸福”为目标和尺度的经济正义观,以及罗尔斯以“作为公平的正义”为基本理念和原则的正义体系,为考察当前我国城乡经济正义问题提供了理论资源.城乡环境正义则主要体现为三个方面:城乡环保制度安排和环境资源分配问题中的程序正义;城乡环境补偿机制中的地理正义;城乡居民承受环境风险的实质正义.     

多维视角下的生态正义

生态正义是当今理论界广泛关注的重大问题,生态正义问题的凸显,拓展了环境伦理学的理论视野,促进了环境伦理学的理论转向,改变了环境伦理学的思维旨趣,也深化了人们对生态危机的根源以及实现人与自然和谐的机制和条件的认识.     

架构正义实现的桥梁——休谟正义论思想发微

在休谟之前,传统正义论表现为德性正义论、神学正义论和自然正义论三种历史形态.休谟在新的历史条件下认为传统正义理论已经失去了整合社会行为的能力.他在批判继承以往学说的基础上,立足于人们的利益需求来诠释正义等观念,主张通过法律来实现正义,进而提出了以人们的共同利益感为基础,以财产权为核心和以法律规则为中介的正义理论,把正义论推进到了一个新的历史阶段,并对后世产生了广泛和深远的影响.     

“伦理正义”的解释力 ——马克思正义观研究的思想背景和可能视角

"伦理正义"是马克思正义观研究的思想背景和可能视角。所谓"伦理正义",是肇始于古典政治哲学的一种正义理解。与"法权正义"基于个体权利追问平等优先还是自由优先的理论争执不同,"伦理正义"以个体德行与公共善的一致为前提,主张个体自由与共同体自由的实践统一。黑格尔对于市民社会和国家关系的思辨把握,揭示了"法权正义"的个体与共同体分裂的二元结构及其困境,探索了以"伦理正义"超越"法权正义"的国家哲学路径。马克思的政治经济学批判指认了"法权正义"与资本主义生产方式的耦合关系,阐释了从异化劳动向自由劳动复归的人类解放逻辑。政治经济学批判是对"法权正义"的根本批判,回答了在现代社会重构"伦理正义"何以可能的问题。     

Does activating justice help or hurt in promoting forgiveness?

Do justice values promote or obstruct forgiveness? This question has received virtually no empirical attention, even though past theorizing suggest two different answers. The literature on forgiveness suggests that justice constitutes a barrier to forgiveness, suggesting that the activation of justice values should decrease the probability of forgiveness. Conversely, the literature on justice and human values indicates that justice and forgiveness are positively associated, suggesting that the activation of justice should enhance the probability of forgiveness. Consistent with the latter line of reasoning, three studies, using complementary priming methods, provide converging evidence for the prediction that the activation of justice promotes (rather than obstructs) forgiveness. Implications for extant theory regarding forgiveness and justice are discussed.     

Justice and employee attitudes during organizational change: The mediating role of overall justice

IntroductionSeveral studies have investigated the mediating role of overall justice (OJ) in the relationships between specific dimensions of justice and employee attitudes. However, prior research has neglected to examine OJ during the process of organizational change, as suggested in fairness heuristic theory (FHT).ObjectiveThis study aims to replicate the results of previous studies and expand them by examining, in two contexts of organizational change implementation, the mediating role of OJ in the relationships between procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice (PJ, ITJ, and IFJ, respectively) and employee attitudes (job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and organizational commitment).MethodologyWe surveyed 537 employees experiencing a company reorganization (Study 1) and 188 employees experiencing a merger (Study 2).ResultsEach dimension of justice is related to OJ, which in turn is associated to employee attitudes. Furthermore, bootstrap results indicated that OJ mediates the effects of PJ, ITJ, and IFJ on job satisfaction and turnover intentions (in both studies), and on affective, normative, and continuance commitment (in Study 2).ConclusionOur findings show the importance of fairness during organizational change. Treating employees fairly in times of change is crucial for managers.     

Can global justice provide a path toward achieving justice across the Americas?

In this article, I investigate actions that the United States took against Costa Rica during the 1980s in order to argue that current discussions about global justice and its foundations are flawed in three ways. First, it misidentifies the parties of global justice as individual citizens. Second, it conceptualizes global justice as exclusively a distributive justice concern and, as a result, it misidentifies what constitutes a global injustice as being the adverse fate of individuals who live in a poor nation. Finally, the current debate provides no guidance in what must be considered to identify the specific obligations one nation may have to another nation. Given these three problems, I maintain that we conceptualize global injustice as an issue of social justice rather than one exclusively of distributive justice. This will require identifying nations as the parties to global justice, at least in certain cases, and realizing that our goal is to remedy oppressive global structures of power. Utilizing the social justice I propose will put us on the road toward achieving justice across the Americas.     

Fair process revisited: Differential effects of interactional and procedural justice in the presence of social comparison information

The competing views of fairness theory ( [Folger and Cropanzano, 1998] and [Folger and Cropanzano, 2001]) and fairness heuristic theory (Van den Bos, Lind, Vermunt, & Wilke, 1997) were tested by studying the effects of interactional (IJ), procedural (PJ), and distributive justice (knowledge of others’ outcomes [OO]) upon evaluations of outcome fairness and customer satisfaction. The participants, 369 undergraduates, were randomly allocated to scenario-based experimental conditions. A 2 (IJ) × 2 (PJ) × 4 (OO) MANOVA and stepdown analyses provided evidence of “fair process” across all levels of distributive justice for outcome fairness (p<.001) and satisfaction (p<.001), but only in relation to the effects of interactional justice. No such effects were found for procedural justice. Implications for the development of justice theory are discussed.     

Traditional prejudice and justice judgments: Does bias suppression moderate the relationship?

This research investigated how the relationship between prejudice and intergroup inequalities with justice judgments is modulated by individual differences in self-regulation of bias through suppression. The first study conducted among 170 White British adolescents revealed that the link between racism and intergroup inequality in justice judgments was moderated by bias suppression. Prejudice, bias suppression, and blatant as well as subtle justice judgments were assessed in a second study carried out with 103 Canadian White adolescents. Bias suppression moderated the link between racist beliefs toward Aboriginals and intergroup inequality in punitive rulings. Racism translated into intergroup inequality in the potential for rehabilitation, irrespective of the level of bias suppression. The role of bias suppression is discussed.     

International justice and individual self-preservation

The article explores the fundamental difference between two aspects of justice: international and global. It is then argued that for the sake of global justice, the difference can be overcome by taking a closer look at the basic human right of self-preservation in relation to moral agency, human well-being and social/distributive justice at both global and national levels. In an endeavour to attain global justice, the article defends an absolute moral right to a human minimum.     

The savings problem in the original position: assessing and revising a model

Abstract

The common conception of justice as reciprocity seemingly is inapplicable to relations between non-overlapping generations. This is a challenge also to John Rawls’s theory of justice as fairness. This text responds to this by way of reinterpreting and developing Rawls’s theory. First, by examining the original position as a model, some revisions of it are shown to be wanting. Second, by drawing on the methodology of constructivism, an alternative solution is proposed: an amendment to the primary goods named ‘sustainability of values’. This revised original position lends support to intergenerational justice as fairness.     

施特劳斯政治哲学的精神与中国传统之重建

该文认为政治就是以公共权力分配为核心内容的游戏;政治学与政治哲学的根本区别在于政治学研究权力游戏规则的运行规律,而政治哲学则研究权力游戏规则的合法性;古典西方政治哲学所形成的是一种正义传统,而它正与中国古典政治哲学的天道传统相呼应。中国近代所形成的革命文化破坏了我们自己的政治哲学传统,重建我们自己的政治哲学和政治文化传统,是当代中国文化建设的核心任务之一。     

Validation française d’un questionnaire des perceptions de justice en milieu judiciaire

To improve the quality of the national justice system, the aim is to test the validity of a questionnaire on the justice perceptions of the criminal procedures and the justice decisions. One hundred and thirty-two defendants were questioned. A factorial analysis directs to a four factors solution: the distributive justice, the procedural justice, the interpersonal justice and the informative justice. After regression analyses, the procedural justice predicts the sentence satisfaction and the procedure satisfaction as well as the anger and the trust. The interpersonal justice predicts the procedure satisfaction and the trust, and the informative justice the satisfaction of the procedure. The results confirm the importance of the perceptions of the justice dimensions to favor positive attitudes towards the judicial institution.