From distribution to justification: contributions of critical theory to distributive justice

Abstract

This article analyses the debate between the authors of the critical theory of justice and the distributivist approach with the aim of questioning which perspective would allow us to better approach the analysis of justice of political institutions and a theory of social action that is guided by normative considerations of justice. The arguments of Iris Young and Rainer Forst will be analyzed, questioning their limitations and advances in relation to the distributivist perspective of John Rawls and Amartya Sen. The first part of the article presents the theories of justice from a distributivist perspective focusing on the work of John Rawls and Amartya Sen. In the second part, the critique formulated by Iris Marion Young and Rainer Forst's later elaborations on his theory of justice are worked on as justification. In the third, there is a reflection on the possibilities of connecting both perspectives with the analysis of public policies and the formulation of a theory of social action. The central purpose is to think about a substantive analysis of public policy that takes into account the action of the individuals involved and the impacts of policy outcomes on their lives or, as Amartya Sen puts it, on the way people's lives develop.