in recent years, with the in-depth economic development, some deep-seated contradictions have gradually emerged. In the street gossip, people can often hear complaints about unfair distribution, and even the aunt who buys food is talking about fairness and justice. There is a poetic language in the Report of the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, "

Fairness and justice are more brilliant than the sun". It seems that fairness and justice are being talked about from the central government to the local government.

First, Rawls' view of fairness and justice

Rawls is a philosopher of Harvard University, and his representative work "A Theory of Justice". His view of fairness and justice holds that social inequality can exist, but it must be based on the premise that the overall welfare and morality of society will be improved if the people with the worst congenital conditions are benefited to the greatest extent. It can be seen that Rawls' view is biased towards the poor in social distribution. He judges whether a society is fair and just, that is, whether the society cares for the poor and whether it helps the people with the worst life in society. Rawls believes that social distribution that takes care of the poor is a government with conscience. The utility of one yuan can explain this problem intuitively: the same one yuan is of little utility to a rich man, but for beggars, it is of great utility to buy a steamed bun or a piece of bread to satisfy their hunger. Therefore, the overall welfare of society will increase if social wealth is tilted towards the worst people at the bottom.

Obviously, Rawls' view of fairness and justice leans towards the disadvantaged groups in society and is beneficial to the poor. However, in order to implement this view, it is necessary to intervene in the public policy. Therefore, some scholars in academic circles think that this view is on the left.

second, Nozick's view of fairness and justice

Nozick is a classical liberal economist, and his masterpiece Anarchy, State and Utopia. Unlike Rawls, Nozick opposes any specific form of state policy intervention to achieve the so-called equality, and the artificial intervention of government policy is a violation of freedom. Will eventually lead to totalitarianism and slavery.

because Nozick believes that inequality is the result of personal choice, as long as people can have the right to choose freely, the market will produce seemingly inequality, which Nozick thinks is fair.

For example, a lazy man chose to loaf around, not go to work, live on welfare, and eventually become poor; And a hardworking person, he chose to work hard, make money hard and get rich. So, do you think this gap between the rich and the poor is unfair or fair? Obviously, Nozick believes that individual's free choice leads to inequality in distribution, which is reasonable and meets the standards of social justice.

However, Nozick's liberalism is based on the perfection of various social systems. The choice of liberalism is based on this basis. The government can severely punish illegal acts and ensure the perfect operation of the economy, and there are no illegal rent-seeking and corruption behaviors. Nozick stressed: If the acquisition of property is illegal (by stealing, cheating, coercion, etc.), then the government should really provide intervention and deal with it in time.

It can be seen that Nozick's choice focuses on liberal personal choice and opposes government intervention. Some scholars think that his theory is right.

Third, the concept of fairness and justice in Adams' theory of fairness

In management, Adams thinks that people are self-interested, that is, people often judge fairness and justice from their own perspective. Based on this, he puts forward a balanced concept of fairness within themselves: the ratio of one's own efforts to income returns, compared with others' efforts and income returns. If the ratio of one's own efforts to income returns is equal to that of others, then it is fair. If the ratio of one's own efforts to income returns is greater than that of others, one will think it is unfair, and one will complain and take resistance actions. On the other hand, if the ratio of one's own efforts and income return is less than that of others, the party concerned will think it unfair, but in the nature of self-interest, he will choose to have fun without opposing this distribution system. In an imperfect country, he will even actively safeguard this unfair distribution system.

perceived comparative effect evaluation results qi/pi < qx/px unfair (low reward) qi/ pi= qx/ px fair qi/pi > qx/px unfair (high reward) where: q is income; P is to pay; I stands for myself; X stands for reference object.

above, several representative views on fairness and justice are briefly introduced, and the social state obtained by applying different judgment standards is different. Under normal circumstances, the losers will complain, while the winners will keep quiet, but they will actively maintain the old system. In his

Preface to Send Meng Dongye

, Han Yu put forward the causal logic about fairness and grievances-"If everything is not flat, it will sound."