Justice Of The Dialogue

Critical Theory is not only a vital branch of contemporary intellectual field in the West world, but also an important paradigm of social-political research. As a crucial branch of contemporary social theory, the main target of the critical theory is to search for the vision of a better future life and its way of realization by critique of the social reality. From Max Horkheimer to Alex Honneth, Frankfurt School has existed almost 100 years. In this period of nearly one century, it has put forward many practical issues and theories. Whatever, the critique of "instrumental rationality" by Horkheimer, the critique of "the technological ideology" by Marcuse, Habermas' "theory of communicative action" and "colonization of the life-world", they all take critical diagnosis of modernity as main tasks. Today, some active theorists are categorized into the third generation of Frankfurt School, on the one hand, they inherit the spirit of the traditional Critical Theory, on the other hand, they try to promote and develop this tradition in the new context of post-industrial, post-modernism and multiple politics.Like the other trends of western philosophy, Critical Theory also highlights political philosophy in its theory. In this tradition, the context of social political discourse has experienced great changes:What are the focus and core of social justice/injustice? What are the causes and properties of current social conflicts? How to build a political-philosophical framework, which not only accords with people's normative expectation of justice, but also internally relates with the experiential background of the social praxis? These issues are debated among theorists of the tradition.This paper will systematically reviews the debate and its significance between the two important philosophers of the critical theory, namely Axel Honneth, the 3rd leader of the Frankfurt School and Nancy Fraser, an American feministic theorist. This paper is entitled as "The Dialogue of Justice", which can be interpreted in two ways:first, I reviewed systematically the different theories about justice of Fraser and Honneth and their argument for respective positions.It means the dialogue is in between Fraser and Honneth. Second, the different consciousnesses and points represented in this debate are practically meaningful for us to ponder on the social issues in China nowadays.In this dialogue, we are not merely standers-by, but also participators, so we are the third partner in the "dialogue of justice".Therefore, the paper is consisted of three sections:Combined with the work collaborated by Fraser and Honneth, i.e.the political-philosophical exchange Redistribution or Recognition?,the first chapter introduces the theoretical paradigms of Fraser and Honneth respectively, namely Honneth's "normative monism" of recognition and Fraser's "perspecitval dualist", which consists of two dimensions-redistribution and recognition. In this chapter I pointed out, that it is just the different understanding of "recognition" that resulted in the divergence of Fraser and Honneth in the issues such as parity and diversity, economic struggles and identity politics.The second chapter firstly discusses the merits and defects of Honneth and Fraser's doctrines reflected in this political-philosophical exchange. Then based on their works after Redistribution or Recognition?, I tried to indicate the meaning of their theoretical routes to social critical theory nowadays.Founded on the previous two chapters, the third one analyzed the feasibility and necessity of the integration of Honneth's and Fraser's theories. On the basis of their respective merits, I suggested a framework of justice presented as a "2×3" structure. What's more, I attempted to resolve the "paradox of disablement" supposed by Fraser and other researchers in terms of this framework so as to polish and develop their theories of justice systematically.