On The Amendment Of Holding Justice To Distribution Justice

The concept of "justice" is one of the core concepts in the field of jurisprudence,and different theories hold different views on the definition of "justice".In ancient Greece,Plato defined justice as "each performs his own duty",while Aristotle believed that the most important connotation of justice is to give the same treatment to the same person and different treatment to different people,that is,to give everyone what he deserves.Since modern times,the most influential theory of justice is the utilitarian theory of distributive justice and Rawls’ theory of distributive justice.The former emphasizes the maximum promotion of community interests(i.e.social interests),while the latter emphasizes the equality of freedom and rights,emphasizing that everyone should enjoy equal freedom.The theory of possessive justice was first put forward by Robert Nozick in 1974.As a response to John Rawls’ s influential book on justice,Nozick published his own book anarchy,state and Utopia,which refuted the utilitarian justice theory and Rawls’ s distributive justice theory,and on this basis,put forward the theory of holding justice.After the publication of the book,the theory of holding justice has also aroused wide discussion and great controversy.Through the analysis of the theory of holding justice,this paper attempts to correct the defects of utilitarian justice theory and Rawls’ distributive justice theory,find a balance between the two justice theories,and find a way that can not only effectively protect individual freedom,but also achieve social efficiency.The first part of this paper is the analysis and elaboration of the theory of holding justice and the theory of holding justice.The second part of the article introduces and analyzes two kinds of distributive justice theories,namely utilitarian distributive justice theory and Rawls’ distributive justice theory,and focuses on the defects of these two theories,such as the neglect of individual rights by utilitarianism,the neglect of giver rights by Rawls’ distributive justice theory and the neglect of subject rights.The third part of this paper attempts to amend the defects of the two theories of distributive justice to some extent based on the principles of holding justice theory,especially Nozick’s qualification theory,historical rights theory and non model distributive justice theory,and hopes to find a balance point between holding justice and distributive justice,through which we can It can meet the needs of individual freedom and social development.