社群主义法律观研究
发布时间：2018-07-20 15:41
【摘要】：社群主义法律观研究社群主义的自我观、权利观、正义观和宪政观。社群主义是在批判以罗尔斯为代表的新自由主义基础上发展起来的一种政治哲学思潮。早期社群主义者主要侧重于对新自由主义核心范畴的驳斥,表现出显著的批判性特质。但是,晚期社群主义者主要致力于建构自己的理论体系,表现出建构主义特质。社群主义的核心范畴是社群与责任。 社群主义认为自由主义的自我观是一种无牵无挂的自我,是一种无社会历史文化根基的虚构,它导致自我的异化和现代性的危机。社群主义主张自我的社会历史文化依附性,它认为只有在具体的社会历史文化框架和背景支配下才能形成构成性的自我理解。它认为只有将自我置于特定的社会历史文化框架和背景下才能找到解决自我异化和克服现代性危机的解毒剂。 社群主义对自由主义自然权利学说的哲学基础持拒斥态度。他认为与自然权利相关的自然状态、社会契约乃是形而上学的虚构。权利的狂野勃发激发了极端个人主义乃至极端利己主义,其结果是责任体系的拔根、社会合作的松弛、共享社群的解体、国家能力的衰弱。它主张责任体系的重构、社会合作的加强、社群价值的共享、国家能力的振兴。社群主义从根本上否定自然权利,替代自然权利的是忠诚、友谊、责任伦理的观念。这些观念乃是法律责任失效的最后担保。社群主义并不一般地否定具体的法律权利,但它更愿意倡导责任的主题化。 社群主义认为自由主义的正义观乃是抽空了社会历史文化内涵的形式理性主义正义观,不可能为本真的社会生活提供合法性。它认为正义应当建立在个人美德、社群公共善、社会(国家或者人类社会)普遍善之层级第次公度的基础上。替代自由主义个人权利实现的正义观的乃是社群主义所主张的社群公共善。 社群主义认为自由主义的宪政观乃是建立在事实与价值背离基础上的程序主义宪政观。社群主义主张美德基础上的实质主义的宪政观。在技术领域,社群主义分享了公民共和主义的宪政观某些价值和偏好。 社群主义与中国儒家思想的诸多共通之处,为我国在法治建设中借鉴社群主义提供了足够的便宜,但在中国的传统和现实的复合作用下,在缺乏自由主义传统的情况下,社群主义对我们是一柄双刃剑,需要我们小心甄别其利弊；在我们的法治建设中,有必要在个人与社群、权利与责任、公益与私利、国家政府与公民之间保持适当的维度和张力。
[Abstract]:The study of communitarianism's view of self, right, justice and constitutionalism. Communitarianism is a trend of political philosophy developed on the basis of criticizing the neoliberalism represented by Rawls. Early communitarists focused on refuting the core category of neoliberalism and showed significant critical characteristics. However, the late-stage communitarians were mainly committed to constructing their own theoretical system, showing constructivism characteristics. The core category of communitarianism is community and responsibility. Communitarianism holds that liberalism's self-concept is a kind of carefree ego and a kind of fiction without the foundation of social history and culture which leads to the alienation of self and the crisis of modernity. Communitarianism advocates the social historical and cultural dependence of self. It holds that only under the control of specific social historical and cultural framework and background can a constructive self-understanding be formed. It holds that the antidote to solve the self-alienation and overcome the crisis of modernity can only be found under the specific social historical and cultural framework and background. Communitarianism rejects the philosophical basis of liberalism's theory of natural rights. He holds that the social contract is a metaphysical fiction in relation to the natural state of natural rights. The wild growth of rights has inspired extreme individualism and even extreme egoism, which has resulted in the root of the responsibility system, the relaxation of social cooperation, the disintegration of the shared community, and the weakness of the national capacity. It advocates the reconstruction of responsibility system, the strengthening of social cooperation, the sharing of community value and the rejuvenation of national capacity. Communitarianism fundamentally negates natural rights and replaces them with the ethics of loyalty, friendship and responsibility. These concepts are the final guarantee of invalidation of legal liability. Communitarianism does not generally deny specific legal rights, but it prefers to advocate the theme of responsibility. Communitarianism holds that liberalism's view of justice is a formal rationalistic view of justice which empties the connotation of social history and culture and cannot provide legitimacy for the original social life. It holds that justice should be based on the first degree of justice at the level of personal virtue, community public good, and social (state or human society) universal good. The alternative to the view of justice in the realization of individual rights of liberalism is the communitarian public good advocated by communitarianism. Communitarianism holds that liberalism is a procedural constitutional view based on the deviation of fact and value. Communitarianism advocates the constitutionalism of essentialism on the basis of virtue. In the field of technology, communitarianism shares some of the values and preferences of civic republicanism. There are many similarities between communitarianism and Chinese Confucianism, which provide enough advantages for our country to learn from communitarianism in the construction of the rule of law. However, under the complex function of Chinese tradition and reality, the lack of liberal tradition, Communitarianism is a double-edged sword for us, which requires us to carefully identify its advantages and disadvantages. In our construction of the rule of law, there is a need for individuals and communities, rights and responsibilities, public interests and private interests. Maintain the proper dimension and tension between the government and the citizens.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D90
本文编号：2134006
[Abstract]:The study of communitarianism's view of self, right, justice and constitutionalism. Communitarianism is a trend of political philosophy developed on the basis of criticizing the neoliberalism represented by Rawls. Early communitarists focused on refuting the core category of neoliberalism and showed significant critical characteristics. However, the late-stage communitarians were mainly committed to constructing their own theoretical system, showing constructivism characteristics. The core category of communitarianism is community and responsibility. Communitarianism holds that liberalism's self-concept is a kind of carefree ego and a kind of fiction without the foundation of social history and culture which leads to the alienation of self and the crisis of modernity. Communitarianism advocates the social historical and cultural dependence of self. It holds that only under the control of specific social historical and cultural framework and background can a constructive self-understanding be formed. It holds that the antidote to solve the self-alienation and overcome the crisis of modernity can only be found under the specific social historical and cultural framework and background. Communitarianism rejects the philosophical basis of liberalism's theory of natural rights. He holds that the social contract is a metaphysical fiction in relation to the natural state of natural rights. The wild growth of rights has inspired extreme individualism and even extreme egoism, which has resulted in the root of the responsibility system, the relaxation of social cooperation, the disintegration of the shared community, and the weakness of the national capacity. It advocates the reconstruction of responsibility system, the strengthening of social cooperation, the sharing of community value and the rejuvenation of national capacity. Communitarianism fundamentally negates natural rights and replaces them with the ethics of loyalty, friendship and responsibility. These concepts are the final guarantee of invalidation of legal liability. Communitarianism does not generally deny specific legal rights, but it prefers to advocate the theme of responsibility. Communitarianism holds that liberalism's view of justice is a formal rationalistic view of justice which empties the connotation of social history and culture and cannot provide legitimacy for the original social life. It holds that justice should be based on the first degree of justice at the level of personal virtue, community public good, and social (state or human society) universal good. The alternative to the view of justice in the realization of individual rights of liberalism is the communitarian public good advocated by communitarianism. Communitarianism holds that liberalism is a procedural constitutional view based on the deviation of fact and value. Communitarianism advocates the constitutionalism of essentialism on the basis of virtue. In the field of technology, communitarianism shares some of the values and preferences of civic republicanism. There are many similarities between communitarianism and Chinese Confucianism, which provide enough advantages for our country to learn from communitarianism in the construction of the rule of law. However, under the complex function of Chinese tradition and reality, the lack of liberal tradition, Communitarianism is a double-edged sword for us, which requires us to carefully identify its advantages and disadvantages. In our construction of the rule of law, there is a need for individuals and communities, rights and responsibilities, public interests and private interests. Maintain the proper dimension and tension between the government and the citizens.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D90
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 蒋先福;彭中礼;;善优先于权利——社群主义权利观评析[J];北方法学;2007年05期
2 贾中海;;正当与善——桑德尔对罗尔斯“正当优先于善”的批判[J];北方论丛;2006年02期
3 应奇,周建华;社群主义的自我观──兼评社群主义与新自由主义之争[J];长春市委党校学报;2001年03期
4 于宏;张天上;;论社群主义权利观对中国法治建设的启示[J];重庆邮电大学学报(社会科学版);2009年06期
5 朱光涛;;论社群主义对自由主义法学的三个挑战[J];长沙理工大学学报(社会科学版);2007年02期
6 顾肃;;社群主义德性观[J];道德与文明;2010年03期
7 资琳;;制度何以为凭?——兼评桑德尔《自由主义与正义的局限》[J];法律科学.西北政法学院学报;2006年04期
8 韦森;个人主义与社群主义——东西方社会制序历史演进路径差异的文化原因[J];复旦学报(社会科学版);2003年03期
9 韩震,李伟;桑德尔对罗尔斯“自我”概念的批判[J];国外社会科学;1998年02期
10 郝鸿军;;麦金泰尔的权利理论[J];长春理工大学学报(社会科学版);2007年03期
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 彭中礼;论社群主义对罗尔斯正义观的挑战与批判[D];湖南师范大学;2007年
，本文编号：2134006
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/falilunwen/2134006.html
