The Extropective Discursive Critique of Justice Paradigms in the Western Political Thought

The goal of this article is to analyze and criticize the different paradigms of the western philosophy in justice issue. From the start of political philosophy in the ancient Greek, the concept of justice has been paid attention. The result of the theoretical and gnostic debates over the justice category has been the formation of the different mental-historical paradigms in the western political thought. It can be classified in three major groups:classical, modern and postmodern paradigms. But there are similarities and dissimilarities inside these paradigms. It seems that these paradigms have been criticized less by the extropective discourse. The present article has shaped around these questions:1. What is the most important distinction between justice paradigms in the thinking of the western world? 2. What are the critiques of these paradigms from the point of the extropective discourse? According to the theoretical approach, the research findings indicate that the specific characteristic of the classic paradigm is justice as metaphysics type and the specific characteristic of the modern paradigm is contractual justice and humanism and the specific characteristic of the postmodern paradigm is relativism justice and essential pluralism 2)absolutism of justice in the classic paradigm, materialism of justice in the modern paradigm and category of justice having no basis(unfounded) and being anti-essentialism in the postmodern paradigm are of the most important extropective discursive critiques governing the west world.