Advances in Sciences and Humanities
Volume 5, Issue 2, April 2019, Pages: 43-48
Received: Dec. 6, 2018;
Accepted: Jan. 10, 2019;
Published: Apr. 12, 2019
Views 490 Downloads 82
Li Yong, Marxist Philosophy Institute, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, China
Zhang Yi, Philosophy, School of Humanities, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
It is supposed that to be just in society is the intrinsic pursuit of Marxist theory in Marx’s original text. While as the result of historical context, according to Marx, the just society can be realized in a far future. Cohen holds materialism standpoint to illustrate historical materialism creatively by functional explanation in the modern history context. In a new time with much more advanced science and technology, he is keeping going with the route of Marxism for overcoming the technique alienation and argues that in order to realize freedom, equality and justice, appealing to empirical critique of technology and exploration of social theory is essential. The demonstration of that freedom, equality and justice are compatible, which is a cornerstone of practical just social theory. As Cohen is in the analytical tradition, his creative functional explanation presents obvious empiricism and analytical character. He digs out the key of resolving problem of development in moral dimension apart from the materialism, and conducts the argument to attack the political designs, which separates free distribution in market, quality in society, and just spirit from each other. This essay is intended to figure out Cohen’s argument that is based on the traditional Marxism and stand, while points out a new way to help people reach the just society at the much more near future.
On Cohen’s Critique of Technology and Social Justice, Advances in Sciences and Humanities.
Vol. 5, No. 2,
2019, pp. 43-48.
Copyright © 2019 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Cohen, G., 1994. Back to Socialist Basics. New Left Review, 0(207), pp. 3-16.
Cohen, G., 2011. Why not Socialism?. Beijing: Renmin press.
Cohen, G. A., 1966. Beliefs and Roles. London, Oxford University Press.
G. A. Cohen, 1989. On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice. Ethics, 99(4), pp. 906-944.
G. A. Cohen, 1995. The Pareto Argument for Inequality. Social Philosophy and Policy Foundation, 12(1), pp. 160-185.
G. A. Cohen, 1997. Where the Action is: On the Site of Distributive Justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 26(1), pp. 3-30.
G. A. Cohen, 2000. If You're an Egalitarian, How Come You're so Rich?. The Journal of Ethics, 4(1/2), pp. 1-26.
G. A. Cohen, 2003. Facts and Principles. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 31(3), pp. 211-245.
G. A. Cohen, 2006. Review: Luck and Equality: A Reply to Hurley. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 72(2), pp. 439-446.
G. A. Cohen, 2008. Self-ownership, Freedom and Equality. Beijing: Oriental press.
Gerald A. Cohen and H. B. Acton, 1970. Symposium: On Some Criticism of Historical Materialism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 44, pp. 121-156.
Hume, D., 2009. A Treatise of Human Nature. Beijing: the commercial press.
Qiao Ruijin, et al., 2013. The British Neo-Marxism. Beijing: Renmin press.
Wei, C., 2008. On Cohen's ' primary life problem'. Lanzhou Academic Journal, 4(175).
Zhongqiao, D., 2013. A Criticism of Libertarianism from the Socialist Perspective: G. A. Cohen's Rebute of Robert
Nozick's ' self-ownership' proposition. Social Sciences in China, Issue 11.
Zhongqiao, D., 2013. G. A. Cohen's Reconsideration of Historical Materialism. Philosophical Researches, Issue 2, pp. 21-28.
Zhongqiao, D., 2013. G. A. Cohen's defense of Three Basic Problems in Historical Materialism. Hebei Academic Journal, 33(2), pp. 29-34.