z korani - Department of Political sciences, Payame Noor University, I.R. of IRAN.

Since old times, social philosophers have attempted to analyze the fundamental frameworks of society and relations of power by relying on intellectual foundations and rational reasoning. In this paradigm, issue of justice has been always central of attention, such that regulation of interrelations among individuals in society has been planned for the purpose of realizing social justice. Subject of justice is not merely a theoretical subject, but it is practical basically and it is integrated with concepts like equality, morality, law, equity and freedom. Concept of justice in its boarder terms, has an integral relation with all concepts and values which are respectable and good, in fact, we can say that justice is the first virtue, that means it is possible that in different intellectual systems in relation to desirability of freedom, equality or joy, there is doubt and limitation of freedom is defensible, but rarely anybody defends limitation of justice of injustice, in political philosophy, the final criterion of virtuous state is concept of justice and in law philosophy, the main purpose of judgement is providing justice. In this research, it is tried to deal with concept of justice in historical form in order to reach a clear conclusion from it in intellectual regimes of Liberalism and democracy social. But the main objective of this research is to compare two liberal theorists concerning their understanding of justice; one, john Rawls that believes justice amounts to equity and other, Robert Nozick. Both of these thinkers claim that their definition of justice is in text of Kant tradition, but we will see that they present two different interpretations

Justice , John Rawls , Robert Nozick