司法認同的期望象徵反思“無偏倚性”程式策略

從分配正義的角度來看，就權力合法性展開的辯護必須要經過每個人兩種內在立場（利己性與公共性）的檢驗，權力不能僅僅自詡具有“無偏倚性”就任意製造每個人內在的分裂和衝突，而應當努力謀求能夠對之加以整合的整體性立場，這在政治構想上形成了基于相互性立場的道德推理方式。其理由在于，相互同意的平等性與開放選擇性使得每個人都可以想像當自己處于那個需要就公共權力之行使給出理由或者表示接受的角色位置時，自己會如何做出判斷，從而形成一種既明確納入每個人自己的理性考慮，同時又能夠通過“無偏倚性”立場檢驗的公共選擇。以此觀之，司法越是以一種高度同質化的決策權力的“無偏倚性”作為自我正當化的程式策略，其越可能在零和的利益博弈中面臨不足為信的認同困境；反之，司法程式越是願意以開放參與和結構分化的決策象徵給當事人提供自我伸張的想像空間，并使之納入經過相互性檢驗的整體性立場之中，就越具有整合認同的程式張力。

From the perspective of distributive justice, the defense of the legitimacy of power must be tested by everyone’s two internal positions(self-interestedness and altruism), where power should not arbitrarily create everyone’s internal division and conflict just by boasting of“impartiality”, but should strive to seek an integrated position, which forms a moral reasoning method based on the position of reciprocity in political conception. The reason is that the equality and open selectivity of mutual consent enable everyone to imagine how they will make their own judgment when they are in the role position that needs to give reasons or express acceptance for the exercise of public power, so as to form a way that can not only be clearly incorporated into everyone’s own rational consideration, but also through“impartiality”public choice of position test. From this point of view, the more justice takes the“impartiality”of a highly homogeneous decision-making power as the procedural strategy of self-justification, the more likely it is to face the identification dilemma of“lack of trust”in the zero-sum interest game. On the contrary, the more self-expanding imagination space the judicial process is provided to the parties with the symbol of open participation and structural differentiation, and brings it into the overall position tested by reciprocity, the more procedural tension of integration and identification there wIll be.