PUNITIVE JUSTICE AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE AS SOCIAL RECONCILIATION

The notion of justice is broad and complex. When we pursue justice too harshly after a conflict, we create new injustice and more victims; when we do not, the offenders usually keep hurting others and the violence is prolonged. As a matter of fact, only a few perpetrators can be punished. On the other hand, does punishment of the offender alone heal the victim or restore peace and harmony in society? Moreover, when the victim forgives, should the society still punish the offender? What role do truth recovery, state tribute (paid to the victims) and monetary compensation play in finding the balance between punitive justice and restorative justice? This paper takes up these issues of justice and, while discussing certain aspects of the relationship between punitive justice and restorative justice in some processes of social (national) reconciliation, tries to present some answers.     

SOCIAL JUSTICE

Social justice (which includes retributive and distributive justice) is most clearly satisfied by a system of Divine rewards and punishments: an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly just Being could determine in each case how much effort was made and effect the appropriate distribution of rewards and punishments. A correct understanding of social justice naturally leads us to suppose that there is an afterlife, a God, a free choice — though it is logically possible at least that social justice could be satisfied in some future (very advanced) human society. There will still be those who have their doubts about the correctness of any view according to which justice cannot be attained by fallible creatures who have an incomplete knowledge of one another's behaviour. But, surely, these doubts are not sufficient to discredit my view. There is no a priori reason for rejecting such a view. There is nothing about our use of the term ‘justice’ and its cognates which implies that such a view is mistaken. (Otherwise the statement “There is no justice in this world’ would be meaningless.) To the contrary, there are widely held religious views, Christian as well as non-Christian, which take this view quite seriously. If there is no a priori reason for rejecting this view, then there must be some independent reason for rejecting it. In other words, we need some independent reasons for believing that social justice can be attained by fallible creatures with limited knowledge. The mere fact that we might feel uncomfortable with my theory is not reason enough to reject it. Finally, those who do experience this discomfort might ask themselves whether such discomfort stems from their moral experience or whether they are simply intent on finding justice in imperfect human institutions.     

LOVE,JUSTICE, AND SOCIAL ESCHATOLOGY

In this paper, we explore the ontological and theological ground of political institutions in order to then reflect upon the eschatological calling of society. The paper builds on Tillich's ontological insight that love does not simply transcend justice, but that it permeates and drives justice, that justice gives form to love's reunion of the separated. This relation between love and justice is at play in political institutions: these unite human beings under forms of justice that must be transformed ever anew if they are not to lose touch with the dynamic power of love and freeze into increasingly unjust juridicalism. The modern history of Western civilisation bears witness to this ontological tension, and the phenomenon of globalisation is yet another instance of human society's mystical calling. Thus, love heads the dynamic movement that transforms political institutions ever anew. Yet society as a whole must become conscious of its ontology for humanity to truly reach its eschatological potential, and this will require both that theology recovers its ground and that political theory thinks theologically.     

RACISM, SOCIAL JUSTICE, AND INTERRACIAL COALITIONS

Is racism in the United States alive and well? Do African Americans still experience alienation and social injustice because of racism? What are the various proposals that have been tendered by conservatives and liberals for overcoming racism? Can interracial coalitions be used as an effective tool for combating racism? I attempt to answer these questions in part by offering an analysis of Cornel West's interracial coalition proposal in Race Matters.     

VIOLENCE,NONVIOLENCE AND THE STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE

In response to the Uppsala Assembly's Martin Luther King resolution (1968), and the controversy provoked by the World Council of Churches' humanitarian aid to groups combatting racism (1970→), the WCC Central Committee (Addis Ababa, 1971) asked its sub-unit on Church and Society to conduct a two-year study on the problems and potentialities of violence and nonviolence in the struggle for social justice. Reporting back to the Central Committee (Geneva, 22–29 August 1973), Church and Society noted that ‘Our task was not to initiate a discussion, for the issues had already registered themselves in the headlines of the press, the agendas of church synods and the consciences of many troubled individuals… Our distinctive role was that of trying to set the issue in a worldwide ecumenical context - which has meant, in particular, heIping white afluent Christians take seriously the perspectives of other parts of the Church.’ The main part of the report took the form of a statement (see below) drawing on work done during the previous two years. It was prepared, Church and Society explained, as ‘an attempt to clarify (not to terminate) the churches' debate. We underline the need for further work on the disagreements and unclarities which remain, and for the kind of genuinely ecumenical perspective on the whole problem without which none of our churches can escape from their various parochialisms.’     

2岁儿童社会性行为发展及其与家庭因素的关系研究

采用陌生情境法等实验方法对52名2岁儿童社会性行为进行研究,同时对其父母用问卷了解儿童问题行为和各种家庭因素资料。研究结果显示我国2岁儿童：（1）安全型依恋比例较高,A型依恋无回避行为;（2）抗挫折和抗诱惑行为较差;（3）安全型依恋问题行为较少,非安全型依恋问题行为较多;（4）各行为间有显著相关;（5）儿童社会性行为与家庭背景、夫妻关系无显著相关,与家庭氛围,亲子关系及父母教养观念有显著相关。     

THE INFLUENCE OF AGE AND SOCIAL CLASS ON AUTHORITARIAN FAMILY IDEOLOGY

The Authoritarian Family Ideology Scale (AFI,,) was administered to four hundred and thirty eight mothers towards the end of their confinement. Raw scores were analyzed by means of multiple linear regression. Chrono- logical age and social class scores were found to give substantial accounts of criterion variance. AFI,, scores tended to drop as age and social class rose. Interaction and curvilinearity did not increase R2 values to a substantial degree.     

POWER IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATION AS THE SUBJECT OF JUSTICE

Abstract: The paper suggests that the state is subject to assessment according to principles of social justice because state institutions or practices exercise forms of power over which no particular person has control. This rationale for assessment of social justice equally applies to legally optional or informal social practices. But it does not apply to individual conduct. Indeed, it follows that principles of social justice cannot provide a basis for the assessment and guidance of individual choice. The paper develops this practice‐based conception of the subject of justice by rejoining G. A. Cohen's influential critique of Rawls’ focus on the “basic structure” of society.