【作者】 刘岩；

【导师】 邵晓光；

【作者基本信息】 辽宁大学 ， 马克思主义哲学， 2014， 博士

【副题名】马克思正义范式视角的解读

【摘要】 自由主义正义范式充斥着自由与平等、权利与功利、道德与政治、先验与经验、道义与目的、利益与理性、假设与现实、逻辑与推理的争论和证明。借布莱恩·巴利对“正义诸理论”分析的方法，我们可以对自由主义正义范式作“要素”式分析——主体、环境、制度、标准——这四个要素包括了自由主义正义的主要部分。“主体”中对人性的利己和理性两条路径的冲突和交杂，使权利和善的优先性成为自由主义正义的焦点，不论如何论证，各方都不可能摧毁“正义优先性”的政治哲学命题；“环境”是人性存在的条件，资源的匮乏成为了正义的重要前提，没有资源的匮乏就不会有利益的争夺，也不会有理性的合作。但是资源环境是由充足到匮乏还是一开始就匮乏，是与不同理论对“自然状态”的假设分不开的。由此就可以把与人性有关的社会分类为私人领域和社会领域，以便由不同的环境开端处理不同的人的关系。“制度”是对人自身和其利用的环境的限制，也就是对自由的限制。它使人性和环境不至于因自由的无限性而产生不正义。但是制度是保护个人权利的还是限制个人权利的，不同的自由主义范式有不同的回答。所以要对个人权利和人与人的合作方式作界定。依据社会契约制订国家制度，或者由其直接先验规定的国家制度保证正义。“标准”是界定正义与不正义界限。自由和平等是正义的主题，也是评价正义的主要标准，从亚里士多德以来就把“适度性”作为正当的标准，实际上，适度性就是对两个极端的限制，使平等成为正义核心部分。由此以后的正义无不围绕着这一主题展开。在寻找正义的第一原则时，自由主义把个人权利作为起始因，而成为自由主义正义的内容。自由主义正义要素具有历史性。也就是各要素因历史不同展现出不同的理论趋向。从自然神到个体人，再到群体正义，正义主体的人性基础使正义理论体系建构成为可能。平等自由成为了自由主义正义的主题以及为其提供框架的内容。从神到人，从上帝到人性都使正义由外在的规定性回归到人自身，自由成为人性的要求，也成为论证人的第一原则。所以，自由主义的诞生是正义历史发展的必然结果，至于道义论、目的论、先验论、经验论在正义研究中的作用也是随着自由主义由古典自由主义发展到功利主义，再到新古典自由主义、新自由主义的过程中，自由平等问题的解决而得到不同理论体系应用的。正义的要素的历史性规定了自由主义发展必然划分的几个阶段，每个阶段都有经典的理论范式。如果从自由主义发展逻辑界定，我们就可以在对自由主义分类的基础上，评述自由主义正义范式的四个范式。这四个范式对自由主义正义范式研究具有意义，特别是对解读马克思正义范式具有方向性意义。四类范式是，财产权利正义范式、否定性正义范式、互利性正义范式、作为公平正义范式。古典自由主义主张政府保护个人权利不受侵犯。而以洛克为代表的古典自由主义和以哈耶克为代表的新古典自由主义在不同的时候表明了这种思想。洛克的自然权利之后的权力与哈耶克的内部规则之下的法律有着相同的路径。只是他们在政府组成形式上随时代发展有所不同。康德对古典自由主义是个反叛。他为新自由主义正义的诞生奠定了基础。新自由主义代表罗尔斯认为理性为自由尽义务，但是他的道义论是经验性的，它是在自然法的约束下行使理性自由，在道义论方法下，他在理念、正义环境、原则、稳定性、社会结构等方面作出了与康德相反的设计。但罗尔斯所针对的是功利主义范式，功利主义范式在吸收古典自由主义范式的政治的和经济的理论之后产生出来，功利主义有两个原则一是效用均等原则一是效用最大化，这两个原则不是并行的，这两个原则都是为寻求最大的社会效果即是正义的标准这一原则。所以从这一点上，它与公平正义分开了，它注重的是结果，公平正义注重的是程序。马克思虽然没有过多论证正义，但是他并不反对正义。对其深入分析会发现，他在对资本主义的批判过程中完成自身正义事业的建构。首先是批判资本主义的正义。马克思对资本主义正义的批判是在自由平等的框架基础上完成的。资本主义正义与自由主义正义有相关性，它使自由由形式转向实质，并切入现实的平等问题。而对正义的概念“析分”中，可以认定人性、物、制度、标准是其四个组成要素，这四个要素构成了自由主义正义的轮廓，也成为了资本主义正义的结构。马克思对资本主义正义中包括的不自由、不平等因素作了批判，认为资本主义对正义的修正和完善没有从根本上完成实质性正义的建构，进而指出了废除私有制度在实现实质性正义中的必然性。其次是对马克思的正义观进行分析，通过特征分析，与自由主义正义范式的比较以及对之进行要素认证，确认马克思社会批判正义范式结构，以及与自由主义正义范式的不同。更多还原

【Abstract】 The justice paradigm of liberalism is filled with a good many of debates anddemonstrations of freedom and equality, right and utility, morality and politics, apriorityand experience, interest and reason, hypothesis and reality, and logic and inference.According to Brian Barry’s analysis methods of justice theories, we should analyze thejustice paradigm of liberalism through four factors–subject, environment, institution andnorm, which contains important contents of the justice theory of liberalism. In subjects,the conflict and entanglement between self-interest and reason, the two sides of humannature, make the priority of rights and good the focus of the justice theories of liberalism.Nobody could deny the political and philosophical proposition of “justice priority” in anycase. Environment is the basis of human existence. The shortage of resources becomes animportant premise for justice. Without it, there would be no competition for interests andrational cooperation. However, whether the resource environment is changing fromsufficiency to deficiency or it is deficient at the very beginning cannot be separated fromdifferent hypotheses on “state of nature”. Thus, human society can be divided into privateand social spheres in order to handle different human relations with a differentenvironmental beginning. Institution imposes restrictions on man and his environment, asa restriction on freedom. Institution prevents human nature and environment frominjustice resulting from unlimited freedom. Different modes of liberalism give differentanswers to the question whether institution is to protect or restrict individual rights, soit’s necessary to define individual rights and man-to-man cooperation. Justice can beguaranteed by a state system based on social contract or derived from direct priorexperience. Norm is used to distinguish justice from injustice. Freedom and equality arethe theme of justice as well as the main norm for justice evaluation. Aristotle firstly used“appropriateness” as the valid criterion for justice. In fact, appropriateness is a restrictionon the two extremes, rendering equality the core of justice. Since then, justice has seldomdeviated from the theme. While looking for the first principle of justice, liberalismregards individual rights as the initial cause, and individual rights becomes the content ofthe justice theory of liberalism. The factors of the justice theory of liberalism are historical. In other words, thefactors have different theoretical trends in different historical periods. From manito toindividuals and then to group level justice, the human basis of justice subject makes itpossible to build the theoretical system of justice. Equality and freedom become thetheme of the justice theory of liberalism and the content for its theoretical framework.From God to man, justice has gradually returned from explicit stipulation to man itselfand freedom has become a human demand as well as the first principle to demonstrate tobe a man. Therefore, the birth of liberalism is a natural result of developments of thejustice theories.With the solution of freedom and equality in the developments ofliberalism from classical liberalism to utilitarianism, new classical liberalism andneo-liberalism, deontology, teleology, apriorism and empiricism have been used indifferent theoretical systems. The historic nature of justice factors determines the divisionof the liberalism development into several stages, which contain classic theories in eachstage.Following the evolution of liberalism, we may make a comment on the fourparadigms of the justice theory of liberalism on the basis of the classification ofliberalism. The four paradigms are significant to the study of the justice paradigm ofliberalism, especially to that of the justice theory of Marx. The four justice paradigms aredistribution of property, negative rules, mutual advantage and the paradigm of fairnessand justice. Classical liberalism believes that government should protect individual rightsfrom violation, which has gained support from traditional liberalism represented byLocke and new classical liberalism represented by Hayek in different periods.There is something in common between Locke’s “rights following natural rights”and Hayek’s “law under inner law”. The difference between them lies in the form ofgovernments in different times. Kant, a revolt against classical liberalism, lays the basisfor neo-liberalism. Rawls, the representative of neo-liberalism, thinks that reason shouldserve freedom, believing rational freedom should be exercised under the constraint ofnatural law. Rawls’ deontology is experimental. His view on idea, justice environment,principle, stability and social structure is in conflict with Kant’s. However, Rawls’ designis aimed at utilitarianism, which is generated by absorbing political and economictheories of classical liberalism. The two principles of utilitarianism, equal utility and utility maximization, are not paralleled, both pursuing the principle that the maximizationof social effects is the norm of justice. In this sense, it deviates from fairness and justicebecause it stresses result while justice emphasizes procedure.The above analysis paves the way for Marx’s notion of justice. Although Marx hasnot made much argumentation on justice, he is not against justice. A profound surveyshows that he completes his own construction of justice by criticizing capitalism. Marxcriticizes capitalist justice based on freedom and equality. Capitalist justice, which isrelated to the justice theory of liberalism turns freedom from form to substance and dealswith the problem of equality in reality. In subdividing the concept of justice, humannature, object, institution and norm form the four factors of the justice theory ofliberalism, which are also the basic structure of capitalism. Marx criticizes such factors asnon-freedom and inequality in capitalist justice. He believes that the capitalistimprovement and amendment of justice has not accomplished a radical and substantiveconstruction of justice, pointing the necessity of abolishing the private system inachieving substantive justice. By analyzing Marx’s notion of justice, comparing with theparadigm of the justice theory of liberalism and identifying its basic factors, thedissertation is to illustrate Marx’s justice paradigm of social criticism and the differencesfrom the paradigm of the justice theory of liberalism.更多还原