person inevitably.

Unequal social institutions are necessarily revolted, while equal and democratic ones are revolted the least, and become the final choice of people. The might is not right any more when society has progressed. The criterion of justice should not be the benefit of someone, but the total benefit of the public.

The law of jungle, however, still works in a large degree, after the foundation of the principle of equality. People are still using the law of jungle now, because scientists cannot provide a unified standard to practice equality for embryo, chimera, animal and other objects, which are always argued about. And more obviously, the fact accords the law of jungle that some people are rich while many others are too poor to survive.

We have to use these two principles together, and the absolute equality will never realize.

Is the absolute equality the final criterion of justice? No. The final criterion of justice is its subjective criterion which accords with the principle of utility, although we have duty to promote the equality. The purpose of human life is to survive, breed and meet needs of themselves, which is the final source of all values and significance. All social rules and ideas, including equality, democracy, good, dedication, moral, law, and so on are instruments to meet benefits of the subject. The principle of equality should be practised as far as possible, only when it is useful for the utility of the most people.

Efficiency is another thing more important than equality. A well-known principle in many countries is that the efficiency is priority while equality should also be taken into consideration. The efficiency means the maximization of benefit of the society, instead of efficiency of any machine or organization. Equalitarianism ever hindered Chinese economy seriously. But efficiency is not able to defend all extreme disparity between the rich and the poor, which is the result of the law of jungle, especially between the rich country and the poor country.

References

1. Fei Teng, & Jianjun Li, “The Debate on Research of Chimbrid,” The Collection of Postgraduate Thesis on the Third National Forum of Philosophy of Science and Technology and Interdiscipline (2010): 568-572 (in Chinese).

2. Sigmund Freud, Introductory Lectures on Psycho-analysis (Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1984), 9 (in Chinese).

3. Karl H. Marx, & Friedrich V. Engels, Anthology of Marx and Engels (3) (Beijing: People's Publishing House, 1994), 776 (in Chinese).

4. Abraham H. Maslow, Motivation and Personality (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc., 1987), 15-31.

5. Yong Duan, Philosophy of Life with Self- organization (Beijing: China Agriculture Science and Technology Press, 2009), 88, 128 (in Chinese).

6. John S. Mill, Utilitarianism, 2nd ed. (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2001), 7.

7. Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (London; New york: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1982), 42.