正义是人类社会最关注的价值诉求之一。阿马蒂亚·森在对古典功利主义和当代罗尔斯等人的理论质疑中，展开了对正义问题的研究。森认为，正义理论应当致力于减少现实生活中存在的明显的非正义，从人们可以过上的实际生活和享受的实质自由的角度来理解公正。可行能力是森理解正义问题的独特视角，也是其正义理论的研究进路。本文首先从可行能力进路的提出、功能性活动与可行能力、可行能力的适用性和有限性、可行能力在测评生活水平方面的应用、可行能力与平等几个方面探明阿马蒂亚·森本人对可行能力进路的发展，继而以森的可行能力进路为研究对象，评述该进路所面临的批判及玛莎·纳斯鲍姆等人对它的更新。以可行能力进路为基础，森对罗尔斯以“基本善”为信息基础的正义观提出质疑。首先，森认为，“基本善”的内涵与特点注定了它无法解决人际差异性，具有信息基础的偏狭性。其次，罗尔斯对正义的研究所采用的是先验制度主义研究方法，而先验制度主义所选择的正义原则及其政治模型无法对现实中非正义问题的解决提供有效指导；先验主义方法本身并不能对各种使我们的社会变得更加公正的方案进行比较，对于令社会变得更加公正而言，先验制度主义既非必要条件也非充分条件；按照先验制度主义的要求，人们做出公正判断的过程中根本不考虑任何焦点团体之外的观点，这种具有封闭性的判断具有程序上的偏狭性、焦点群体的可塑性与排他性。这些弊端在理论和实践层面上都难以克服。 质疑并剖析了罗尔斯的正义论之后，森提出了以可行能力为进路的正义论。森的正义论采用比较现实主义的研究方法，以消除社会中存在的非正义为出发点，通过部分排序，发展各种比较标准以指导现实决策。该正义论以可行能力为信息基础，既能够顾及资源的重要性，又能够考虑对福祉的关切，还能兼顾对实质自由的高度关注。具有广度和敏感度的可行能力视角要求以开放的中立性作为正义研究的客观性要求，评价公正问题需要全人类眼睛的参与，正义的实现也需要突破地域性的概念，涵盖全人类。民主作为实现全球正义的途径，其实质是通过公共讨论，在多元的基础上寻找共有观念，达至全球范围的公共理性。而理性被视为一种合理审查的方法，人们可以按照不同的标准做出判断和选择，以社会选择理论为指导，通过公共讨论、理智的思考和批判性的审思，对不同个体的不同考量之相对重要性进行比较排序，在诸多备选方案之中做出理性的集体决策。

Justice is one of the most concerned value appeals in the human society. Amartya Sen, in his questioning of the classic utilitarianism and the ideas of contemporaries such as Rawls, developed his own study of the issue of justice. He argues that the theory of justice should be dedicated to reducing obvious injustice in our real life, and that justice should be interpreted from the perspective of people's actual life and the substantive freedom that people can enjoy. Capability is the perspective from which Amartya Sen views the issue of justice and the approach with which he studies the theory of justice. This paper first explores Sen's own development of the Capability Approach from aspects such as the proposition of the Capability Approach, functioning and capability, the suitability and limitation of capability, the application of capability in evaluating the standard of living, capability and equality, etc. Then, with Sen's Capability Approach as the study object, the paper comments on the critique of this approach and its development by people such as Martha Nussbaum.Based on the Capability Approach, Sen questioned Rawls's justice viewpoint, which was founded on the information basis of the "primary goods". First, Sen argues that due to the connotation and features, the "primary goods" cannot resolve interpersonal differences. It has informational parochialism. Second, Rawls's study of justice adopted the research method of transcendental institutionalism. The justice principles and political model selected by transcendental institutionalism cannot provide effective guidance on the resolving of injustice problems in reality. The transcendental approach cannot, on its own, address questions about comparing alternative proposals for having a more just society, thus the transcendental approach is neither a necessary condition nor a sufficient condition as far as making the society more just is concerned. As required by the transcendental approach, people out of the focal group would give no consideration to the viewpoints while making an impartial judgment, such closed judgment has procedural parochialism, plasticity and exclusiveness. These drawbacks are difficult to overcome theoretically and the transcendental approach has no practical significance or value in reality.After refuting Rawls's justice theory, Sen proposed his own justice theory based on the Capability Approach. Sen's idea of justice adopted realization-focused methods, with the aim of reducing social injustice, and developed, through partial sequencing, various comparison criteria to guide actual decision-making. This justice theory, with capability as the information basis, not only covers the importance of resources but also addresses people's concern with well-being, as well as the focus on substantive freedom. To have a wide and sensitive capability perspective, we need to take open impartiality as an objective requirement in justice research. The evaluation of justice should involve all human beings, and the realization of justice should transcend regional concepts and cover all of the world. As an approach to realize global justice, democracy is essentially to find common ideas on the basis of differences and diversity through public discussion, so as to achieve public reasoning worldwide. Rationality is considered as a method of reasonable examination, with which people can make judgment and choices based on different criteria. Guided by the social choice theory, through public discussion, reasonable thinking, and critical deliberation, people can sort the different considerations of different individuals in the sequence of their relative importance and then make rational collective decisions from many alternative solutions.