Book Review: Considering Social Justice: A Review of David Miller's Principles of Social Justice

Miller's volume is a useful, thorough, and innovating overview of the subject of social justice. It inspires three lines of critical response. The first involves the symbiotic role of philosophy and empirical inquiry in the analysis of justice. The second involves the qualities of opportunity that ought to underlie justice. Finally, there are a few lessons regarding the status of justice in the overall evaluation of society that can be learned from the case of the United States, which has an anomalously bad record with respect to distributive justice. The centrality of politics is one of the implications of the analysis.     

作为“中介”的“复合平等”——沃尔泽对罗尔斯分配正义理论的批判及其限度

沃尔泽认为,罗尔斯通过＂原初状态设置＂所演绎出的＂正义二原则＂只是一种实现通常之＂简单平等＂的分配正义原则,无法解决由诸多领域所构成之社会的分配正义问题。因而基于对西方世界分配现状的观察及其人性观,沃尔泽提出了＂复合平等＂的分配正义理论。事实上,只有罗尔斯的＂正义二原则＂才能有效实现社会的分配正义。因此,沃尔泽的分配正义理论实际上只是深刻理解罗尔斯＂正义二原则＂的＂过渡理论＂或＂中介＂,而不是对后者的根本性超越。     

论刑法平等原则的理论基础

平等是指人们相互间权利获得与义务履行的相同性 ,它应是一种相对平等、地位平等。刑法平等应是权利意义上的人人平等 ,它以形式平等为原则 ,反对结果平等 ,但同时也应包括实质平等的内容。就目前而言 ,可接受的实质平等只能是给弱者优待 ,而不能给强者特权。上述意义的刑法平等原则 ,应在基本原则中居于最高地位 ,应担负起罪刑法定、罪刑均衡无能为力的任务     

Equity,equality, and need: A study of the patterns and outcomes associated with their use in intimate relationships

This study examined the extent to which specific justice principles (equity, equality, and need) are associated with different orientations within complex relationships. This contrasts with previous research that has focused on the extent to which justice principle use varies across relationships representing distinctly different goals. Forty-eight men and 60 women were randomly assigned to conditions of equity, equality, or need. Each was asked to describe a recent incident from their own relationship illustrating the principle to which they were assigned. Incidents were coded into one of three domains representing the multiple orientations of intimate relationships. Subjects in the need condition were more likely to describe incidents related to issues of nurturance or personal development, whereas subjects in equity and equality were more likely to describe incidents related to the allocation of responsibilities. Subjects in the equality condition rated their principles as a more desirable basis for decision making in intimate relationships than subjects in either equity or need. Regardless of the relationship domain, subjects in the equality as compared to the equity condition also reported more positive feelings about the decision and themselves as well as more positive and less negative feelings toward their partner.     

依靠法治满足人民对美好生活的要求研究

美好生活是人民对于高品质生活的理想追求,而法治则在满足人民美好生活方面发挥着至关重要的作用.要通过法治的平等原则确保人人拥有平等的人格、规定人人相同的地位以及赋予人人同样的法律机会,为人的尊严感的达致奠定基础.人民福祉是法治的根本目标,要通过法律制度来缩小收入分配差距、确保不同群体之间资源的公平分配以及地域发展上的互补...     

平等视野中的消费者权利解读

虽然从产生之初人类就一直进行着消费活动,但消费者权利的提出却并非与人类消费行为的出现同步。消费者权利的产生需要一定的条件,这主要表现为消费者问题的产生和消费者保护运动的开展。消费者权利作为保护消费者利益的法律手段,其产生昭示了法律对平等的追求,是人权的平等观和平等的正义观的体现,具有正当性。     

Equality and differentiation: Effects of group structure on allocations

Two studies using vignettes explore some conditions under which equity, equality, and need as allocation rules are taken into account by an outside allocator. Independent variables include information about success or failure of a work group, level of morale of the group, relative contributions of work group members, responsibility for outcome, and influence of one individual on others. Results suggest that differentiation based on both equity and need results from a focus on individual deserving while equality among status equals results from focus on group level factors. An interaction between outcome and contribution appears when group level factors are included; these effects also appear when there are two rather than only one target person differing from the rest of a group; an overreward effect depends on attributions of responsibility for outcome; and an influential member is seen as deserving even if a low contributor. No gender differences were found.     

论社会基本制度的正义——对罗尔斯正义理论的讨论

社会的根本问题均可归结为社会基本制度问题,而社会基本制度问题的核心则是正义问题。社会基本制度的正义必须建立在正义对效率的优先性和自由对利益的优先性原则之上。在罗尔斯看来,正义的优先性是一个关乎人们的尊严与价值以及社会合作的可能性与有效性的条件。     

Equality,fairness, and social conflict

There are three generic problems that arise in the use of the concept of equality as a principle of fairness. These problems concern (i) determining when equality is appropriate as opposed to some other principle, (ii) deciding how equality is to be operationalized, and (iii) determining how to implement equality. The proposal is made that these intrapersonal decision conflicts are mirrored by social conflicts when multiple interests are involved. This way of looking at social conflicts also suggests some novel ways to approach conflict resolution.     

Bread and roses: Justice and the distribution of financial and socioemotional rewards in organizations

Two studies tested the hypothesis that organizational decision makers attempt to counterbalance contribution-based distributions of financial/material rewards (a “merit” system that creates monetary inequality) with need- and equality-based allocations of socioemotional rewards, in effect allocating “roses” in lieu of more “bread”. Experiment 1 had a two-factor design (Reward Type × Magnitude of Income Inequality); 67 subjects were given a managerial in-basket exercise in which they expressed their preferences for a variety of distributive justice rules for seven different types of rewards. Experiment 2 (N=39) had the same design, with a stronger manipulation of magnitude of inequality. Results of the two experiments were consistent with the counterbalancing hypothesis, irrespective of magnitude of income inequality; financially related rewards (e.g., profit sharing, office space, company cars) were distributed with more emphasis on contribution rules (i.e., performance, status), while more socioemotional rewards (e.g., help for an employee's spouse, friendliness) were allocated with more emphasis on equality among individuals, equality across groups, and personal need.     

美国反倾销法的正义分析

正义是衡量一种法律制度是否可欲的终极价值目标。从正义这一价值判断标准出发,对美国反倾销法进行分析,将会使我们认识其本质:以社会福利为代价保护国内某些产业的利益,是一种实质非正义的法律体系。     

辩诉交易公正价值之重新审视

公正是司法的最高价值,司法公正具有相对性和多元性。辩诉交易构建于控辩对等的诉讼模式之上,众多相关制度确保了其客观与公正。同时,辩诉交易凸显了诉讼民主、体现了解纷中的效率价值、实现了公正与效率的均衡、确保了公正的最大化,内含着巨大的公正价值,具有旺盛的生命力,因此,借鉴国外先进的司法制度,构建中国的辩诉交易制度当无理念上之障碍。     

Thoughts on Juvenile Justice Systems and Research

This article updates comments published in this journal in 1994 about the nature of the American juvenile justice system, which laid out reasons that it might not serve as a useful model for other nations. Since that time, the US system has moved further right towards the justice model and away from the welfare model. Individualistic philosophies and political conservatism have combined to produce a more adult-like and punitive juvenile system, applied to increasing numbers of minors and to increasingly younger minors. Successful demonstrations of community absorption or treatment have been too few to balance the rightward direction. European scholars are urged to undertake increased studies in two critical areas: (1) the nature, functions, and comparative differences in their juvenile justice systems, and (2) the nature of local communities and their contributions to patterns of delinquency.     

Welfare state, unemployment, and social justice: Judgments on the rights and obligations of the unemployed

This article reports judgments on the rights and obligations of the unemployed in The Netherlands. A large majority of the Dutch population is shown to support (i) the unemployed’s right to social security as well as their obligation to work, (ii) the principle that declining a job offering should be punished, and (iii) harsh sanctions in some specific cases of job refusal. An emphasis on the obligation to work results from conservative attitudes regarding both distributive justice (economic conservatism) and retributive justice (cultural conservatism). Furthermore, conservative attitudes regarding distributive justice derive from a privileged economic position (especially high income and infrequent experience of unemployment), whereas conservative attitudes regarding retributive justice result from a restricted cultural position (low level of education, technical rather than cultural type of education, and limited involvement in arts and culture).     

How Is Criminal Justice Related to the Rest of Justice?

Are principles of criminal justice derived from a broader conception of justice, or does criminal justice involve some of its own distinctive principles such that it is not—for example—an aspect of distributive justice? Examining considerations regarding luck and desert provides an illuminating approach to this issue. The notion of desert has largely been excised from a great deal of recent political theorizing, and in particular, it has been eliminated from many influential conceptions of distributive justice. It is widely held that the pervasiveness of luck renders desert inappropriate to contexts of distributive justice, and incompatible with the freedom and equality of persons in a just political community. Should considerations of desert also have a minimal role in criminal justice—where they seem to still be important? Are considerations of desert in the context of criminal justice consistent with persons being free and equal participants in a just political community? How are principles of criminal justice related to principles of distributive justice and political justice in an overall just society? Many scholars agree that criminal justice presupposes an adequately just society. Still, that leaves open just how criminal justice relates to justice overall. That is the present topic.     

Liberalism and capabilities: Theories of justice and the neutral state

Modern liberal theories share the idea that the state and its laws should remain neutral with respect to the varying conceptions of the good life held by individuals. This article discusses the way in which this notion of neutrality is defined and justified. Rawls's theory of justice is shown to be a prime example of such a theory. Questions are raised, however, if Rawls's theory has adequately formulated the conditions that would make it possible for each citizen to fulfill his own conception of the good. After arguing that Dworkin's solution to this problem is also problematic, it is argued that Sen's solution to the question of what conditions create neutrality shows the way ahead.     

Distributive Justice and Attitudes Toward the Welfare State

Current debates concerning the viability of the welfare state evoke the question of the social bases of support of the welfare state. Past research has documented fairly consistent relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes toward welfare policies. Yet, the nature of these relationships is not well understood. In the paper we argue that the level of support for the welfare state is largely determined by the principles of distributive justice espoused by individuals as well as their images of society. We develop a theoretical framework, which outlines the structural relationship between social attributes, principles of justice, perceived conflict, and support for the welfare state. Using data from a recent population survey on the legitimation of inequality, conducted in Israel in 1999 (N = 1057), we test a number of hypotheses. For the empirical analysis we use structural equation modeling with multiple indicators. Our findings reveal substantial support for policies aimed at reducing inequality. At the same time we find strong support for rewards according to merit and unequal earnings distribution. The impact of social attributes on attitudes toward the welfare state is partially mediated by the justice principles and images of society.