论平等的自由主义与社群主义之争

以罗尔斯为代表的平等的自由主义理论致力于探讨公平问题,试图建立一种脱离任何形而上学立场的"程序正义"。这一理论由于其所体现的普遍主义、个人主义等特征,成为社群主义的主要批判对象。罗尔斯的政治自由主义某种程度上是对社群主义的批评的一种回应,但并不能消除社群主义的质疑。另一方面,社群主义也不能根本否定或取代自由主义,充其量只是这一理论的补充。     

20世纪70年代以来英美学者的正义理论之争

罗尔斯正义理论的核心是自由优先于平等,正义优先于效率。他对平等的重视,导致了西方政治哲学的主题由"自由"向"平等"转换。他对功利主义的批评,使以权利为导向的自由主义取代了功利主义。诺齐克针对罗尔斯的分配正义,提出"持有的正义",从而在自由主义内部构成对罗尔斯正义理论的批判。麦金太尔站在社群主义的立场上,提出重视共同体的正义,直接对抗自由主义的正义理论。柯亨利用分析马克思主义的方法,指出诺齐克的正义理论没有正确处理正义与自由、正义与私有财产、正义与自我所有的关系,论述罗尔斯仅将正义的主题界定为社会基本结构的不足,进而提出重视个人选择、个人风尚的正义。     

多元正义理论的当代阐述——戴维·米勒多元正义理论述评

米勒的正义理论挑战了包括罗尔斯等自由主义政治哲学中坚持单一正义原则的各种学说,倡导一种"社会情境多元正义论"。这一理论根据社会情境具体的实践需要,采取具体的正义原则的方法分析了三种关系模式与三种正义原则的对应关系;在如何实现社会正义的问题上,米勒重视结果正义,但同时主张要保证程序的公平;面对全球化和文化多元主义的挑战,米勒提出了社会正义追求应采取的两手对策。米勒的多元正义理论拓展了正义理论的研究空间,为21世纪正义理论的探索提供了可借鉴的思路,但其理论因缺乏世界历史视野而存在着一定的局限性。     

徘徊于社群主义与共和主义之间——以桑德尔对权利自由主义的批判为例

在社群主义的重要代表人物中,如果说麦金太尔为社群主义的自由主义批判提供了历史和语言学的奠基,并归宗于受到亚里士多德主义强烈影响的“历史传统限制的实践理性观”,那么桑德尔则更多地借鉴黑格尔主义和后现象学的哲学资源,对以罗尔斯为代表的权利自由主义进行了最为明快、尖锐和深刻的批判,但是同时,这种批判也最为典型地表现出徘徊、依违于社群主义与共和主义之间的特征。本文从自我观、社群观以及对美国政制中失落的共和精神的追寻三个方面全面地探讨了桑德尔的政治哲学,并阐发了笔者对于自由主义、社群主义和共和主义之间的关系,以及走出这种三元对峙困境的观点。     

社群主义对自由主义之批判

社群主义对自由主义的批判主要从普世论、个体论和社群价值三个方面展开,并显示出从抽象的哲学向具体的政治学的兴趣转向,即争论的焦点不再是自由主义的哲学基础问题,而是现实的政治设计问题。社群主义在东亚国家得到了更多的回应,这既有政治原因也有文化原因。     

罗尔斯的“原始境况”:一种非契约主义的政治推理模式

原始境况(original position)是罗尔斯正义理论中的一个重要论证武器,对它的剖析将十分有助于理解罗尔斯的正义理论.根据罗尔斯的描述,原始境况本身是一种思想实验,也是一种体现契约主义的代表设置.其中,代表设置被罗尔斯放在一个比较重要的位置上,并以此强调自己的契约论立场.然而,原始境况并不像罗尔斯以为的那样具有明显的契约主义特征,它的根本意义在于,它是一种实现公共反思和自我澄清的思想实验.本文立足于罗尔斯的文本,通过对原始境况理论的清晰展示来说明,原始境况其实更多地展现了一种非契约主义的政治推理模式.     

朝向正义与德性--奥尼尔论正义与德性的统一

正义与德性是西方伦理学的两个重要范畴,当代自由主义与共同体主义围绕二者的关系问题展开了激烈的论辩,使其成为当代西方伦理学争论的焦点.本文详细地分析了英国女哲学家奥罗拉·奥尼尔对此问题的观点奥尼尔主要是站在自由主义的立场上,针对共同体主义对自由主义的批评,重新解释了实践理性、规则、正义、德性等自由主义的核心概念,试图在一种新的实践理性的基础上达到正义与德性的统一.     

自然权利与罗尔斯的正义理论

当代政治哲学兴起的标志是新自由主义的诞生,新自由主义诞生的标志则是罗尔斯《正义论》的出版。罗尔斯对社会契约的使用方式预设了原初状态中的签约者具有某种先在的权利,这种先在的权利植根于人的一种自然的道德人格能力。人在道德人格能力上的平等使得每个人都应该得到平等的关心和尊重。这表明作为公平的正义建立在一种自然权利的根本预设之上,这一根本预设就是平等的关心和尊重。这一预设使得罗尔斯的正义理论具有一种自然权利论特征的同时又超越了传统的自然权利论的自由主义。     

论拉兹的至善主义及其得失

正统的自由主义者都是“反至善主义的”。虽然拉兹是一名自由主义者,但他举起至善主义的大旗,试图对自由主义提供一种激进的解释,以探索一种既不同于古典自由主义也不同于新自由主义的第三条道路。拉兹的政治哲学介于自由主义和社群主义之间。     

当代西方公平正义理论及其元哲学问题

公平正义是当代西方政治哲学的主题.1971年罗尔斯的正义论的发表带来了西方政治哲学的复兴,而西方政治哲学的争论就是围绕罗尔斯的公平正义理论展开的,罗尔斯的公平正义理论强调平等的优先性,反对他的诺奇克的持有正义理论强调自由的优先性,而哈耶克的交换正义论则强调公平自由竞争的市场机制与秩序的优先性.在当代西方政治哲学关于公平正义的论争中也涉及元哲学问题的根本分歧,主要关涉事实与价值的关系问题,建构论理性主义与渐进理性主叉问题.这些元哲学问题是公平正义理论得以自立的基础,是价值合理性的共享性理解的理性基础.     

Socratic Dialogue and Self-Directed Group Work: Strengthening Ethical Practice in Social Work

Socratic dialogue is a practical method of philosophical inquiry used to develop ethical and critical thinking among participants. On the other hand, self-directed group work is a practical intervention model based on social justice principles aimed at empowering service users and clients in social work and community work contexts. This conceptual article aims to reflect on a combination of the two models, arguing that group work interventions inspired by Socratic dialogue and self-directed group work may represent a way for social workers to develop a better ethical stance in their practice.     

论苏格拉底的伦理道德思想的价值取向

苏格拉底是西方哲学史上第一位人生哲学家。他的伦理道德思想在今天仍不失其现实意义,本文从知识即道德,守法即正义,自制是道德的基础三个方面分析了苏格拉底的伦理道德思想的价值取向。     

Being与系词

Being这个词在哲学翻译中究竟翻译成“是”还是“存在”,是国内哲学界一直争议的问题.文章认为,being既有“是”的意思,也有“存在”的意思;但相对而言,“是”的意思是必要的,“存在”的意思不是必要的,因此,翻译成“是”更符合being的本义.     

“五四”后中国两种宪政观的比较及启示

＂五四＂后中国自由主义者的宪政观存在着以抽象人权取代人的现实生存权,试图脱离自由主义经济基础而构建宪政上层建筑的倾向。实际上,宪政总是包含＂限政＂与民主这两个向度,自由主义者强调了宪政的＂限政＂这一向度,继而强调了一种消极意义上的人权;毛泽东则强调了宪政的＂民主＂这一向度,从而看到了国家权力与公民权利之间的同一性,为发展出一种积极意义上的人权提供了可能。     

SPCIAL ISSUE： DIALOGUE,INTERACTION AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN PHILOSOPHY IN CONTEMPORARY CHINA - SPECIALIST FORUM ON CHINESE,WESTERN AND MARXIST PHILOSOPHIES：A dialogue among Chinese,Western and Marxist philosophies： problem field,thematic dimension and value content

任何时代的哲学思考,都必然是基于“公共性”问题的公共哲学思考。中、西、马哲学对话强调对如何达成现代人类之深刻的“公共性文化和价值信仰”的普遍共识问题的深切关注,其对话主题以为当代人类提供新的生存和发展理念为旨归：即以生态公共性和生态正义观念为核心,提倡“共生”的价值理念;奉行正义公共性,提倡对话、“合作”、“共享”的价值理念;奉行主体交往理性,提倡“共在”的价值理念。     

Seeing with the Hands,Touching with the Eyes: Vision,Touch and the Enlightenment Spatial Imaginary

ABSTRACT

Blindness has been a topic of great interest for philosophers, and the centrality of the so-called Molyneux problem explicitly raises questions concerning visual and tactile experience of the blind. Begun as a purely speculative philosophical exercise before ophthalmic operations could be performed, the debate continues and is examined here in relation to current work in psychology and neuropsychology. From debates and correspondence in the seventeenth century onwards, sparked by this hypothetical question, first-person accounts of the blind were sought to bolster the philosophical speculations. The question asked by Molyneux is crucial in Enlightenment philosophy, and is discussed in a series of dialogs between philosophers such as Locke, Berkeley, Descartes and especially Diderot. This paper shows how a philosophical debate rooted in a distinct period in history has continued to excite the attention of those who attempt to draw together a psychological philosophy of sensory-spatial experience. In particular, the Molyneux problem concentrated on the interaction of the visual and the tactile, of hands and eyes, and how they are involved in spatial cognition. The legacy of these debates concerning the spatial imaginary of the blind remain pertinent to this day.     

Punishment as retribution

The article is concerned with punishment as retribution. A number of reasonable assumptions concerning the punishment of criminals as well as the punishment of innocent individuals are made. These assumptions are consistent and from them a comprehensive justice map is drawn. Several implications concerning justice are derived and there is an analysis as to where slack in the pursuit of justice is most likely to occur. It is then shown that all of the assumptions and consequently all the results can be derived from a simple utility maximization model. Throughout the paper, behavior consistent with the concept of retribution is presented and there is some comparison to other theories of punishment. More generally, the article can be seen as a building of a social welfare function. In contrast to other work on social welfare functions which begin with just methods of aggregating preferences, this article begins with just preferences.I would like to thank David Kaun and Richard Posner for their comments.     

Social Philosophy of the Australian Assistance Plan

The basic philosophy of the AAP is often referred to in discussions about its implementation. Seldom, however, does one come across an intensive examination of relevant philosophical concepts. This paper takes three such ontological concepts—power, justice, concern—and examines them in themselves and in relation to each other in the context of the AAP.     

Deep Ecology's contributions to social work: A ten‐year retrospective

Besthorn FH. Deep Ecology's contributions to social work: A ten‐year retrospective In the last decade, a new generation of social workers have made great strides incorporating environmental awareness into their theoretical formulations and practice modalities. This is a welcome development for a profession often conspicuously absent in the emerging international consensus that Earth's capacity to support life is in deep trouble. Beginning in the 1980s and 1990s, a few intrepid North American social workers began to raise the alarm concerning the scope and extent of environmental decline. Several social work scholars implored the profession to play a more active role in raising ecological awareness and take a seat at policy and practice forums debating environmental issues. Deep Ecology, founded by the late Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess, offers a comprehensive philosophical framework upon which social work might draw in the development of its conceptual orientations. This article examines the current manifestations of Deep Ecology as a philosophy and socio‐political movement. It briefly assesses the evolution of social work's nascent interest in the natural environmental, examines historical precursors influencing Deep Ecology, reviews several key concepts of Deep Ecology, discusses ongoing applications of deep ecological ideas to several disciplines and suggests how deep ecological ideas might help inform social work's understanding of social justice.