Contemporary Distributive Justice:Reconsidering From The Perspective Of "Desert"

In the history of Western political thought and philosophy,there is a long tradition of“desert” as the core basis for discussing the issue of “justice”.As the basis for the distribution of social benefits and burdens,the term of “desert” plays an important role in distributive justice.The development of contemporary equality concepts has led some philosophers rejected this tradition.Represented by Rawls,he rejects the theoretical basis for a system of distributive justice based on“desert” which include contingencies such as natural endowments.As such,this paper will examine Rawls’ desert-claims in detail,considering how individual desert to be fulfilled within the framework of social justice.This paper teases out the evolution and contrast of the connotation of “desert” in the context of distributive justice in ancient and the modern times,highlighting that the notion of “desert”based on chance factors was once seen as a reasonable basis for distribution.However,in contemporary context,it is unable to meet the demand for equal treatment for all.To address this dilemma,Rawls focuses on fair justice and rejects any consideration of “desert” within the framework of social justice.Some scholars have a biased understanding of this,mistakenly believing that Rawls does not leave any room for “desert” in distributive justice.Therefore,this article refutes the partial rationality of Rawls’ desert-claims in distributive justice through a detailed analysis of the metaphysical and epistemological arguments,while also indicates some flaws in Rawls’ desert-claims.These flaws can be reconciled with the perspective of Luck Egalitarianism.Starting from the two terms of “desert” and distributive justice,this paper clarifies the connotation of “desert” under the background of distributive justice,and provides a theoretical basis for answering the question of why Rawls excludes “desert” from distributive justice.By dialectically clarifying the misunderstanding caused by Rawls’ desert-claims,it is argued that Rawls did not completely exclude “desert” from distributive justice,but reduced the rank of“desert” in distributive justice,and after fusing Luck Egalitarianism,finally formed a distributive concept with a strict logical structure,making it possible for individual deserve to be fulfilled within distributive justice.