权利与善的关系辨正
合集下载
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
社会契约论者与功利主义、马克思主义等理论在“权利”内涵方面存在着根本分歧， 自然权利与实证法的争论延续至今。自然权利本身具有着诸如“自由”、“平等”、“安 全”等基本道德价值或基本社会价值，但作为自然权利道德根据的义务概念始终模糊不 清，使之难以于实践中应用。以自然权利理论作为根据的社会契约论者，无论是古典自 由主义论者，还是以罗尔斯为代表的新自由主义论者，在处理权利与善的关系时，都存 在无法弥补的缺憾，“权利优先于善”的探寻并不能构成一种牢靠的现代政治秩序；边 沁坚持着实证法的理论立场，但他提出的“善优先于权利”的观点也往往面临“牺牲少 数人权利和利益以换取最大社会净效用”的指责；对“权利优先于善”提出质疑的社群 主义者们，其理论主要是对罗尔斯正义论的反思与批评，虽然提出了共同体生活的重要 性，但也没有提出能够具体应用于实践的措施或解决办法。因此，无论是“权利优先于 善”，还是“善优先于权利”，都没有找到关于政治合法性的真正来源。
中图分类号： UDC：
密 级： 本校编号：
10652
硕士学位论文
论文题目：
权利与善的关系辨正
研究生姓名：
蔡诗燕 学号： 20150101050025
校内指导教师姓名： 李军
职称：
教授
校外指导教师姓名：
申请学位等级： 硕 士
职务职称：
学科： 哲学 专业： 伦理学
论文提交日期： 2018 年 3 月 12 日 论文答辩日期：
因此，在探讨权利与善真正的关系、阐述政府正当性的指向时，笔者将“权利与善” 的论争转向“制度与善”的探究，以此出发，提出“制度伦理”概念，论证政治合法性 的真正来源，寻求当代真正牢靠的政治秩序，从而为当今的社会建设提出一些建议。
关键词：权利；自然权利；正义原则；善
1
Abstract
The relationship between rights and goodness, as an indispensable research topic in the political field, has formed different perspectives of many schools of thought, with complicated contents and profound meanings. Taking the development and change of contract theory as an entry point, we trace back to the development context of "rights and goodness" based on the history of respect and reflection. The "right" has a strong personal touch, but it is not independent of the entire society, just as everyone will not be willing to stay away from the crowds and go alone to these islands to enjoy these rights. To be exact, the various issues related to "rights" have infiltrated into all aspects of individual life and social life and have taken root in all directions and infiltrated the trajectory of the community's operation. "What exactly is the right", "whether the rights can not depend on any special good idea in the life of the community", and "how should the relationship of rights and goodness be" ...... The continuous thinking and questioning of the above problems have formed the theory of "rights and goodness" The meta-questions, the answers to the meta-questions, on the one hand, form the justification of the government's legitimacy.
1
Therefore, to discuss the relationship between rights and goodness and elaborate the direction of government legitimacy, the author puts forward the concept of "institutional ethics" and puts forward some suggestions for the present social construction.
（一）不同学说体系的“权利”内涵阐述........................................................................ 5 （二）基于自然法的权利内涵........................................................................................7 二、权利与善的关系论说......................................................................................................11 （一）权利优先于善...................................................................................................... 11 （二）善优先于权利......................................................................................................21 三、权利与善关系之正见......................................................................................................32 （一）“制度伦理”概念澄清......................................................................................34 （二）理据立场的流行意见与辩难..............................................................................35 （三）如何对制度进行伦理分析..................................................................................36 结 语..................................................................................................................................38 参考文献..................................................................................................................................39 致 谢..................................................................................................................................41
内容摘要
权利与善的关系作为政治领域中不可或缺的研究议题，形成了众多流派的不同观点， 内容繁杂且意义深广。以契约理论的发展与变化作为一个切入点，在尊重与反思历史的 基础上，回溯关于“权利与善”理论的发展脉络。“权利”负有浓厚的个人色彩，但它 并非是独立于整个社会的存在，正如每个人都不会愿意远离人群、去往孤岛独自享有这 些权利。可以确切地说，与“权利”相关的种种问题已渗透到个体生活和社会生活的方 方面面，全方位的扎根、渗透到共同体运行的轨迹之中。“权利到底是什么”、在共同 体生活中“权利是否能够不依赖任何特殊善观念”、“权利与善关系应当如何”……对 以上问题的不断思索与追问，形成了“权利与善”理论的元问题，对元问题的解答则从 某方面构成了政府正当性的证明。
论文独创性的声明
本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文是本人在导师指导下开展研究工作取得的成果； 尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，论文不包含其他人已经发表或撰 写过的研究成果，也不包含为获得 西南政法大学 或其他教育机构的学位或证书而 使用过的材料；对于与我一同工作的同志对本研究所做的任何贡献，均已在论文中作 了明确的说明并表示谢意。
学位论文作者签名:
签字日期: 年 月 日
学位论文版权使用授权书
本学位论文作者完全了解 西南政法大学 有关保留、使用学位论文的规定。即： 学校有权保留所送交的论文，允许论文被查阅和借阅，可以公布以向有关部门和机构送交论文的纸质复印 件和电子版本。
(保密的学位论文在解密后适用本授权书)
学位论文作者签名:
导师签名:
签字日期： 年 月 日
签字日期： 年 月 日
硕士学位论文
权利与善的关系辨正
The Relationship Between Right And Good
作 者 姓 名： 指 导 教 师：
蔡诗燕 李军
西南政法大学 Southwest University of Political Science and Law
Key words:Rights;Natural rights;The principle of justice;Goodness
2
目录
引言............................................................................................................................................1 一、权利的内涵........................................................................................................................5
There is a fundamental disagreement between the theory of social contractarians and utilitarianism and Marxism on the connotation of "rights," and the debate on natural rights and positive law continues to this day. Natural rights themselves have such basic moral values as "freedom", "equality" and "security" or basic social values. However, the concept of obligation as the moral basis of natural rights has always been vague and makes it difficult to apply them in practice. The social contractualists based on the theory of natural rights, whether classical liberalism or neoliberalism represented by Rawls, have irremediable shortcomings in dealing with the relationship between right and goodness, The exploration of "the priority of rights over the good" does not constitute a solid modern political order; while Bentham maintains the theoretical position of positive law, his point of view that "good takes precedence over right" is often confronted with "sacrificing the rights of minorities and Interest in return for the greatest net effect of society "; communityists who challenged" rights over precedence "are mainly based on the reflection and criticism of Rawls's theory of justice, although the importance of community life is raised However, no measures or solutions that can be applied in practice have been proposed. Therefore, neither "priority over right" nor "good over right" has been found to be the true source of political legitimacy.
中图分类号： UDC：
密 级： 本校编号：
10652
硕士学位论文
论文题目：
权利与善的关系辨正
研究生姓名：
蔡诗燕 学号： 20150101050025
校内指导教师姓名： 李军
职称：
教授
校外指导教师姓名：
申请学位等级： 硕 士
职务职称：
学科： 哲学 专业： 伦理学
论文提交日期： 2018 年 3 月 12 日 论文答辩日期：
因此，在探讨权利与善真正的关系、阐述政府正当性的指向时，笔者将“权利与善” 的论争转向“制度与善”的探究，以此出发，提出“制度伦理”概念，论证政治合法性 的真正来源，寻求当代真正牢靠的政治秩序，从而为当今的社会建设提出一些建议。
关键词：权利；自然权利；正义原则；善
1
Abstract
The relationship between rights and goodness, as an indispensable research topic in the political field, has formed different perspectives of many schools of thought, with complicated contents and profound meanings. Taking the development and change of contract theory as an entry point, we trace back to the development context of "rights and goodness" based on the history of respect and reflection. The "right" has a strong personal touch, but it is not independent of the entire society, just as everyone will not be willing to stay away from the crowds and go alone to these islands to enjoy these rights. To be exact, the various issues related to "rights" have infiltrated into all aspects of individual life and social life and have taken root in all directions and infiltrated the trajectory of the community's operation. "What exactly is the right", "whether the rights can not depend on any special good idea in the life of the community", and "how should the relationship of rights and goodness be" ...... The continuous thinking and questioning of the above problems have formed the theory of "rights and goodness" The meta-questions, the answers to the meta-questions, on the one hand, form the justification of the government's legitimacy.
1
Therefore, to discuss the relationship between rights and goodness and elaborate the direction of government legitimacy, the author puts forward the concept of "institutional ethics" and puts forward some suggestions for the present social construction.
（一）不同学说体系的“权利”内涵阐述........................................................................ 5 （二）基于自然法的权利内涵........................................................................................7 二、权利与善的关系论说......................................................................................................11 （一）权利优先于善...................................................................................................... 11 （二）善优先于权利......................................................................................................21 三、权利与善关系之正见......................................................................................................32 （一）“制度伦理”概念澄清......................................................................................34 （二）理据立场的流行意见与辩难..............................................................................35 （三）如何对制度进行伦理分析..................................................................................36 结 语..................................................................................................................................38 参考文献..................................................................................................................................39 致 谢..................................................................................................................................41
内容摘要
权利与善的关系作为政治领域中不可或缺的研究议题，形成了众多流派的不同观点， 内容繁杂且意义深广。以契约理论的发展与变化作为一个切入点，在尊重与反思历史的 基础上，回溯关于“权利与善”理论的发展脉络。“权利”负有浓厚的个人色彩，但它 并非是独立于整个社会的存在，正如每个人都不会愿意远离人群、去往孤岛独自享有这 些权利。可以确切地说，与“权利”相关的种种问题已渗透到个体生活和社会生活的方 方面面，全方位的扎根、渗透到共同体运行的轨迹之中。“权利到底是什么”、在共同 体生活中“权利是否能够不依赖任何特殊善观念”、“权利与善关系应当如何”……对 以上问题的不断思索与追问，形成了“权利与善”理论的元问题，对元问题的解答则从 某方面构成了政府正当性的证明。
论文独创性的声明
本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文是本人在导师指导下开展研究工作取得的成果； 尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，论文不包含其他人已经发表或撰 写过的研究成果，也不包含为获得 西南政法大学 或其他教育机构的学位或证书而 使用过的材料；对于与我一同工作的同志对本研究所做的任何贡献，均已在论文中作 了明确的说明并表示谢意。
学位论文作者签名:
签字日期: 年 月 日
学位论文版权使用授权书
本学位论文作者完全了解 西南政法大学 有关保留、使用学位论文的规定。即： 学校有权保留所送交的论文，允许论文被查阅和借阅，可以公布以向有关部门和机构送交论文的纸质复印 件和电子版本。
(保密的学位论文在解密后适用本授权书)
学位论文作者签名:
导师签名:
签字日期： 年 月 日
签字日期： 年 月 日
硕士学位论文
权利与善的关系辨正
The Relationship Between Right And Good
作 者 姓 名： 指 导 教 师：
蔡诗燕 李军
西南政法大学 Southwest University of Political Science and Law
Key words:Rights;Natural rights;The principle of justice;Goodness
2
目录
引言............................................................................................................................................1 一、权利的内涵........................................................................................................................5
There is a fundamental disagreement between the theory of social contractarians and utilitarianism and Marxism on the connotation of "rights," and the debate on natural rights and positive law continues to this day. Natural rights themselves have such basic moral values as "freedom", "equality" and "security" or basic social values. However, the concept of obligation as the moral basis of natural rights has always been vague and makes it difficult to apply them in practice. The social contractualists based on the theory of natural rights, whether classical liberalism or neoliberalism represented by Rawls, have irremediable shortcomings in dealing with the relationship between right and goodness, The exploration of "the priority of rights over the good" does not constitute a solid modern political order; while Bentham maintains the theoretical position of positive law, his point of view that "good takes precedence over right" is often confronted with "sacrificing the rights of minorities and Interest in return for the greatest net effect of society "; communityists who challenged" rights over precedence "are mainly based on the reflection and criticism of Rawls's theory of justice, although the importance of community life is raised However, no measures or solutions that can be applied in practice have been proposed. Therefore, neither "priority over right" nor "good over right" has been found to be the true source of political legitimacy.