Conception Of Justice Held By Rawls' "justice Of The Distribution Concept" Nozick, "" Controlled Study

In a society where wealth has been polarized and the living condition of some people have been increasingly worsen, what is the reason of the lightness of wealth distribution? How can the distribution of important basic items ensure that basic rights and equality of human beings be just? Rawls, a moderate liberalist, and Nozick, a radical liberalist, from the common standpoint of liberalism, deeply investigate distributive justice in different directions and explain a series of important problems as follows: what are the object resources of distribution? what is the distributive justice? what are the standards and procedures that ensure just distribution? what are the basic foundations that will affect us finding the rational distributive principles?Starting from the right of equality, Rawls animadverts utilitarianism and substitutes it for "two principles as fairness and justice" in which rational people choose under the "original position", and thinks everyone should be equal and people should distribute wealth according to "the principle of justice as fairness", unless you have the enough reasons that can justify everyone should be unequal. He understands the distributive object as a series of public resources and systems of liberty, including the positions and offices, opportunity, natural endowment, honor, safety, freedom of life and action, freedom of thought and conscience. The aims of distributive principle of justice are to realize rational distribution of these public resources in a cooperative and well-ordered society. Starting from inalienable rights of man, Nozick thinks that everyone should be unequal, unless you have sufficient reasons that can justify everyone should be equal and without the consent of the individual, others can not infringe upon his property and rights with any excuses. He advances the justice of "holding" with a theory of qualification and entitlement, and maintains individual economic and free rights and the right of property.This thesis investigates thoroughly the source of two conceptions of justice, i.e. "the conception of distributive justice" and "the conception of holding justice". It makes clear the relationship between Rawls and Locke, Kant, elucidates Rawls's priority of freedom of Kantian style and the idea of freedom and equality of Lockean style. It also makes clear the relationship between Nozick and Locke, Kant in another direction, illuminates Lockean elements of Nozick's property theory and a Kantian absolute order, i.e. "person is a purpose".This thesis also differentiates between Rawls and Nozick in the following important aspects: the liberal equality, the right of property, the duties of social cooperative systems, and the attitudes to the poor and the significance of social stability etc, and evaluates the two different conceptions of justice on those aspects. We can attains some conclusions in this paper, Nozick emphasizes the rightness of property holding and historic justification of the origin of property, Rawls highlights on the right of equality and cares for people who live in inferior position. Nozick stresses the ownership of natural development of property "holding" and advocates the theory of "the minimal state". In order to arrive at goals of social justice and good, Rawls tries to reduce the gap in social and natural chanciness, and insists on the redistribution of property under the interposition of the public reason and public power.