自由主義、平等與差異原則

Liberalism, Equality and the Difference Principle

周保松(Po-Chung Chow)

《政治與社會哲學評論》 8期 (2004/03) Pp. 121-179

https://doi.org/10.6523/168451532004030008004

摘要

本文旨在探討羅爾斯的差異原則的道德基礎，即為什麽經濟不平等分配，必須在對社會受益最小者最為有利的情況下才被容許。我將指出，差異原則的證成繫於三個條件，道德平等從道德的觀點看沒有人應得其自然秉賦：自然秉賦的分配應被視為社會公共資產。我繼而提出以下批評，一，羅爾斯以人的自然的道德能力證成道德平等是不充分的，而他的「康德式」的形而上學論證則令他的契約論變得多餘，並難以回應合理的多元王義的挑戰。二，他視自然秉賦的分配為公共資產，將和他強調的重視個體的獨立與分離，產生鉅大張力。三，滿足差異原則下的社會分配的不平等程度，和人們的動機系統密不可分。而人們的自利動機，有可能令得差異原則變成不得已的妥協，並因而和羅爾斯主張的平等主義精神不相容。

關鍵字

羅爾斯 ； 社會正義 ； 差異原則 ； 道德平等 ； 自然秉賦 ； 自由主義

並列摘要

This paper aims to examine the moral foundation of Rawls's Difference Principle, to wit, why unequal economic distribution is morally acceptable only if it is to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged. I shall argue that its justification is based on three conditions: moral equality; regarding natural talents as underserved from a moral point of view; viewing the distribution of natural endowments as a common asset. I then raise my three corresponding criticism. First, it is insufficient to justify moral equality on the basis of natural moral capacities. But Rawls' Kantian metaphysical argument in turn makes his contractarian argument redundant and difficult to respond to the challenge of reasonable pluralism. Second, Rawls's viewing the distribution of natural talents as a common asset is in great tension with his emphasis on the separateness and distinction of individuals. Third, the degree of economic inequality under the Difference Principle is closely related to citizens’ motivational system. Allowing economic incentive to come into play would be incompatible with Rawls's egalitarianism and risk the Difference Principle being a compromise.

並列關鍵字

Rawls ； social justice ； Difference Principle ； moral equality natural talents ； liberalism

參考文獻

Rawls, John(1972).(A Theory of Justice).

Rawls, John(1999).(A Theory of Justice).

Nozick, Robert(1974).(Anarchy, State and Utopia).

Rawls, John(1999).A Kantian Conception of Person.(Collected Papers).

Kymlicka, Will(2002).(Contemporary Political Philosophy).