阿马蒂亚·森的分配正义观

阿马蒂亚·森的分配正义见解 ,以主体为中心 ,一方面强调分配上的能力本位 ,主张源头的产出保证 ;另一方面 ,注意分配是外部条件 ,提倡分配过程中的权利平等。这是对罗尔斯正义论的具体化 ,是从经济伦理学的视野对分配正义的新认识。但是对能力及其与效用关系的解释上 ,需要进一步完善。     

论马克思的分配正义思想

马克思关于分配正义的思想是我们深入理解与准确把握当代中国分配正义问题的思想基础与理论前提.在马克思的视阈中,"分配"既具有经济学、社会学意涵,又具有哲学的形上意蕴.资产阶级以"劳动决定权"为前提,在分配中注重程序、忽视结果的"平等权利",其结果是造成分配的不正义.正义的分配应该超越"平等权利",以人的全面发展为分配原则与价值目标,使人真正享有人类文明与社会进步的成果,创造更为丰富的社会财富.     

分配制度公平对员工分配公平感的影响:中国组织情境下的实证研究*

西方组织公平领域的主流观点认为要想提高员工的分配公平感,应着力提高分配过程的公平性以及上下级互动的公平性,即程序公平和互动公平。本研究发现:在中国组织情境下,较之程序公平和互动公平(人际公平、信息公平),分配制度公平对员工分配公平感的解释力最强;在分配制度不公平的情境下,程序公平和人际公平才会影响分配公平感,仅仅起到亡羊补牢的作用。     

Distributive Justice and Enviromental Sustainability

Andrew Dobson has outlined three conceptions of environmental sustainability: the 'critical natural capital' conception; the 'irreversibility' conception; and the 'natural value' conception. He has also attempted to map out the various 'dimensions of social justice'– his purpose in so doing being to analyze the 'encounter' of each conception of environmental sustainability with the points on his map. Not surprisingly, Dobson concludes that as one moves from the 'critical natural capital' conception through the 'irreversibility' conception to the 'natural value' conception of 'sustainability', the 'points of contact' with his map of 'the dimensions of social justice' are found to 'become fewer and further apart'. In this article I argue that Dobson is fundamentally confused in his reason for thinking why this is so. I also argue that a core argument he deploys concerning future generations cannot do the work he requires of it.     

Luck and the Domain of Distributive Justice

相似文献   

Kant on International Distributive Justice1

This paper concentrates on the way Kant's distinction between duties of right and duties of virtue operates at the interstate level. I argue that his Right of Nations (V ölkerrecht) can be interpreted as a duty to establish a kind of interstate distributive justice (that is, as a duty to secure states in their independence and territorial possessions), which is called for to secure domestic distributive justice and to protect individuals' freedom and private property. Or at least this is ‘ideal theory’ for, as I specify, this cosmopolitan linkage is compromised by Kant's endeavour to accomodate the existence of non-republican states.     

分配公正、程序公正、互动公正影响效果的差异

以大学生奖学金评比为例,探讨了组织公正各维度影响效果的差异。以661名大学生为被试,采用2×2×2的完全随机设计,以情境故事法（scenarios）呈现刺激,研究了奖学金评比中分配公正、程序公正、互动公正对大学生学习投入、班级荣誉感、班级归属感、与辅导员的关系的影响。结果表明,组织公正三个维度与效果变量之间存在清晰的对应影响关系：分配公正主要影响具体、以个人为参照的效果变量;程序公正主要影响与组织有关的效果变量;互动公正主要影响与上司有关的效果变量。     

Rawlsian and Confucian Distributive Justice and the Worst Off

Philosophia - In any complex human society, distinct persons may have strikingly different standards of living. Those who lead the most undesirable, poorest lives in society can be called the worst...     

Nationality, Distributive Justice and the Use of Force

To whom do we owe obligations of distributive justice? In the last decade a number of distinguished political theorists — such as David Miller and Yael Tamir — have defended a nationalist account of our distributive obligations. This paper examines their account of distributive justice. In particular, it analyses their contention (a) that individuals owe special obligations to fellow-nationals, (b) that these obligations are obligations of distributive justice and (c) that these obligations are enforceable. Miller and Tamir's justifications, I argue, do not support these claims. Moreover, I argue, (a) and (c) should only be accepted in a greatly qualified form and (b) should be rejected altogether. The paper thus concludes that the nationalists' preferred account of distributive justice is untenable.