集体主义视角的道德原则的合理性研究

发布时间：2018-01-05 14:24

本文关键词：集体主义视角的道德原则的合理性研究　出处：《太原理工大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：道德原则是一个与我们的社会生活密切相关的话题。更多意义上道德及道德原则对人们的行为举止是一种约束,那么,我们为什么要这样做,为什么必须这样做,道德合理性来源于何处,这样做就一定正确吗?关于这个问题的论证,国内有学者做这方面的研究,但总体而言是批判多,建设性研究少,特别是从集体主义视角对此问题进行研究,只是有人提出了方向和思路,却还无人沿着此方向和思路深入研究。而在西方,道德原则的合理性研究多是从个人主义立场出发来研究的,或是从上帝出发来论证的。而本文则是在继承与批判的基础上,对道德原则的合理性提出了一个全新的论证。本文首先从一些基本概念出发,什么是道德原则的合理性?什么是道德原则的合法性?两者关系如何?我们知道,任何社会都必然会确立一个能为其社会成员提供主导的价值观念和评价标准的道德原则。但是,这种道德原则的确立并不是伴随着社会的建立而出现的,它的确立过程必须经过必要的合理性论证才能实现。如果,一个社会的道德原则无法证明原则自身的合理性和正当性,不能找到合理的道德依据,那么类似于“我为什么这样做”和“我应该怎样做”的根本问题就会困惑人们,社会的道德规范和道德约束就会缺乏一种逻辑上的合理性,无法使人们自觉遵循道德规范,整个社会就会有一种潜在的混乱的危险。所以我们非常有必要为社会主导的道德原则的合法存在做强有力的论证,论证之前我们需要搞清楚被论证的问题是如何产生的。所以,本文在第三章论述了道德原则的合理性问题的起因,指出欧洲文艺复兴和工业革命之后,人们从宗教的束缚中解放了出来。人们不再将《圣经》看作是唯一的真理,传统上将道德原则归结为上帝的命令的合理性就消失了,问题也就产生了,我们该怎么做,为什么要这么做,这么做对吗……本文第四章重点批判了以霍布斯为代表的唯意志论、边沁的功利主义、康德的自由意志说以及实在论等西方主要流派对于道德原则合理性理解上的偏颇与错误。最后,本文第五章在合理批判的基础上,从一个新的视角即从多元集体主义角度基于多元集体主义人的社会属性的本体论预设和多元主体、多元价值的本体论预设,用集体自发优化趋势来解释道德原则的合理性,从而为道德原则的合理性论证找到了一种历史唯物主义的科学解释。
[Abstract]:A moral principle is closely related to our social life topic. Moral and moral principle more sense is a constraint on people's behavior, so why do we need to do this, why must do so, what is the source of moral rationality, do it right? About this argument and domestic scholars do research in this area, but overall is critical, the construction of less, especially from the perspective of collectivism on this issue, people just put forward direction and ideas, but also no one along the study in this direction and ideas. In the west, the rationality of moral principles are to study starting from a personal standpoint, or to prove from the point of view of God. And this is based on inheriting and criticizing the rationality of moral principles, put forward a new argument.
This paper starting from some basic concepts, what is the justification of moral principles? What is the legality of moral principles? The relationship between the two? We know that any society must establish a sense of value and can provide evaluation criteria for the leading members of society's moral principles. However, this kind of moral principles and not accompanied by the establishment of social and the process of establishing it must be necessary to achieve rationality. If the moral principles of a society cannot prove its own principle of rationality and legitimacy, can not find a reasonable moral basis, then a similar fundamental problem on "why do I do" and "how should I do" people get confused, social ethics and moral constraints will lack a logical rationality, can make people abide by the moral standards, the whole society Will there will be a potential danger of confusion. The legal existence of moral principles so it is very necessary for us to do the leading social strong argument, the argument before we need to understand by the question is how to produce. Therefore, this paper discusses the causes of the moral principles of rationality, in the third chapter, after that European Renaissance and industrial revolution, the people liberated from the bondage of religion. It was no longer the Bible as the only truth, traditionally moral principle attributed rationality as the command of God disappeared, the question becomes, how do we do this, why did you do it, do it in the fourth chapter. The key criticism represented by Hobbes's voluntarism, Bentham's utilitarianism, Kant's free will theory and realism of western main schools on moral principles of rationality of Science The solution of bias and error. Finally, the fifth chapter of this paper based on rational criticism, from a new perspective, namely social attributes of multiple people collective ontological presupposition and multi subject based on collectivism from multiple angles, on the presupposition of multi value ontology, with the collective self optimization trend to explain the rationality of morality the principle, in order to find a kind of historical materialism is a scientific explanation for the rationality of moral principles.

【学位授予单位】：太原理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B82-02

【相似文献】