论儒家义利思想的逻辑体系及其意义

一般人们往往以现代西方伦理学的尺度武断地将儒家义利观认定为重义轻利的义利观。其实传统儒家义利观是不断“与时进焉” ,不断演进和丰富的体系。可以从两个层面理解儒家义利观体系 ,即 :本体论层面和价值论层面。在道德本质上 ,它坚持了道义主体论倾向 ,逻辑表述为 :义为利之本 ,义重利轻 ,义以建利 ,义利统一。就价值而言 ,个体人在现实中所面对纷争进行正确选择应具备的道德素质是基础性应用价值 ;更重要的社会价值在于政治伦理意义上 ,要求统治者施行“仁政”。传统儒家义利观 ,经过不断演进 ,通过有效解决现实世界利益冲突形成道德观念体系和操作原则 ,成为中国主流义利观 ,并对后世产生深远影响。     

实现行政道德责任的道德人格性依据及制度正义原则的建构

作为公共权力的运作者和实施者,公务员应承诺包括行政道德责任在内的许多责任。现实中,行政道德责任的落实并不容易甚至出现缺失状况。为此,应该强化道德人格,坚持制度正义原则。道德人格是实现行政道德责任的依据,制度正义原则是实现行政道德责任的保障,二者相辅相成,共同促进责任的实现。     

A note on the prisoner's dilemma

This paper clarifies some basic concepts or assumptions of the prisoner's dilemma, asserts the independence between the two agentsA andB, and advocates the application of the dominance principle of decision theory to the prisoner's dilemma. It discusses several versions of the prisoner's dilemma, including the one-shot and repeated cases of a noncooperative game from a purely egoistic point of view. The main part of this paper, however, is a study of the problem from a moral point of view through a special decision-theoretic approach. Morality is taken into account by incorporating the utility of the feeling of moral satisfaction for the agent, as a part of the total utility for the agent, into the decision-theoretic model. In this way the problem will appear as a purely technical decision problem, and the conflicts between various assumptions, or the dilemma caused by the problem, will no longer exist. It is also pointed out that in a more general case, for some values of the coefficient of moralityk, dominance will not exist so that the dominance principle will not be applicable.     

农村民间纠纷调解中的公平建构与公平逻辑

本文以当代农村的调解实践为切入点,探讨在不同的纠纷类型和不同的情境中,纠纷的公平解决是如何达成的,以及背后遵循着怎样的公平原则。本文发现：维持人际关系延续的调解目标,调解人的角色定位、道德背景及其权威性,调解过程中包括上门调解等多种调解技巧和策略的运用,以及符合农村社会人们所普遍认可的公平提案等,是影响纠纷调解协议即公平达成的重要因素;而社会关系维系、公平的关系性以及综合性等,是中国农民公平观的重要特征。     

The utilitarian contract: A generalization of Rawls' theory of justice

In a series of major papers culminating in A Theory of Justice, John Rawls constructs an alternative to utilitarianism by developing a social contract theory of moral and political philosophy. Unfortunately, Rawls formulates the two basic principles upon which the theory rests in such a way as to restrict (unduly) the contract theory's applicability (see Section I). In this paper we present a more general discussion of the theory of justice that avoids the problems of Rawls' formulation and yet retains the important idea of justice as fairness and the contractarian approach (Section II). Later it is argued that this more general theory constitutes a bridge between the pure utilitarian theories and the social contract doctrines (Sections V and VI). The theory's advantages are demonstrated by applying it to a problem discussed by Rawls, intergenerational equity, and comparing the two solutions (Section III). Further comparisons are made and inferences drawn in the concluding three sections.Without implicating them, we would like to thank James M. Buchanan and David Lyons for comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

---

     

德性幸福与功利幸福的融合致思-论荀子对儒家幸福原则的改良

荀子的幸福观由儒家精英转向社会大众,对于“孔颜之乐”“君子之乐”奠定的德性原则有所改良.在性伪之辨上,荀子以性恶论为基础,由“性伪之分”起始而至于“以伪饰性”,构建了“合性伪”的幸福原则;在理欲之辨上,荀子对“礼”的起源做了理性主义的解释,由“养人之欲”“给人之求”起始而至于“以道制欲”“合于文理”,构建了“统理欲”的幸福原则;在义利之辨上,荀子调整了孔孟思想中义利之间紧张冲突的状况,由人性“生而好利”起始而至于“以义制利”“先义后利”,构建了“兼义利”的幸福原则.“合性伪”“统理欲”“兼义利”致力于实现德性原则与功利原则的融通,“两得”成为荀子幸福原则的特质所在,从而使儒家幸福观呈现出德性幸福与功利幸福“双峰并峙”的局面.     

以权力正当性的形式要求为基础的形式法治——对罗尔斯《正义论》中法治理论的解读

对罗尔斯的法治理论有两种解读,一种是形式法治论,另一种是实质法治论.但形式法治论不能解释罗尔斯对法律的形式要求源自对自由的保证,而实质法治论证又不能解释为何罗尔斯认为法治与不正义是相容的.如果将对自由的保证看做是对权力正当性的形式要求,则可以很好地理解罗尔斯对法治的论述.在这种理解的基础上,探讨以权力正当性的形式要求为基础的形式法治论,可以说明形式法治的道德价值在于削弱权力本身之恶.     

The Criminal Justice System and the Politics of Scrutiny

The criminal justice system remains largely untouched by over a decade of scrutiny and restructuring of public services by consecutive Conservative administrations. This is despite the system's lack of accountability, absence of clear objectives, prolific unfettered spending patterns, and discrepancies in its treatment of suspects and offenders at all stages of the prosecution process as witnessed by regular and embarrassing “mishaps”. This paper explains the apparent contradictions in the New Right's social policy agenda showing how the overtly Thatcheritepolicies of “law and order” with its own brand of moral authoritarianism continues to immunize and protect the professional players on the criminal justice stage from the policies of scrutiny and consequent change. Ironically, it is argued, criminal justice and penal policy is one area of social policy where the machinery of appraisal, audit and management by objectives would be highly beneficial. Paul Wilding provided stimulating and helpful comments on the first draft of this paper and Howard Parker helped me to keep the contradictions of the system as the theme of the paper.     

公正观念的民间认同:“叶玉珍”财产继承案分析

在法律秩序达成官方和民间（国家和社会）两个面向的分析框架下,黄宗智和张静分别从“实践”和“利益分配”的角度提出民间面向上存在的两种解释维度。本文从“叶玉珍”财产继承案出发,着重探讨公正观念的民间认同,认为在抽象原则上,官方和民间都认同“权利和义务一致”的公正观念,但在义务的具体内容上,存在个人义务与家族义务的认同冲突。由此,本文回溯历史,梳理明清以来寡妇财产继承权的变迁,进一步揭示其中所反映的公正观念在官方和民间认同上的一致与冲突,提出在民间这一面向上,“公正观念的民间认同”是以往未注意到的另一解释维度,从而试图对法律秩序的达成加入新的解释维度。     

Nozick on Sen: A misunderstanding

This discussion examines Robert Nozick's claim inAnarchy, State, and Utopia (New York 1974) that his entitlement theory of justice avoids the paradox of collective choice shown by A. K. Sen inCollective Choice and Social Welfare (San Francisco 1970). Nozick argues his system is a stable principle of distributive justice. The author shows Nozick's principle of justice in transfer qualifies as a social decision function in Sen's sense because it is a collective choice rule and meets necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of a choice function. Next the author demonstrates Nozick's principle of justice in transfer requkes Sen's conditions of unrestricted domain, the Pareto principle, and liberalism which are the conditions of the Sen paradox Nozick claims to avoid. Thus, Nozick's principle of justice in transfer is shown not to be a stable principle of distributive justice.     

The Moral Dilemmas of Positive Discrimination

Positive discrimination is a contentious topic both politically and in social policy terms. Reasoned debate about it has been hampered by a fundamental misunderstanding about what it is and what makes it peculiar, that took hold in the immediate post-Plowden era. This paper argues that what distinguishes positive discrimination from other practices with which it has been confused, such as selectivity and positive action, can only be understood in terms of basic canons of social or distributive justice. Having established the moral standing of positive discrimination, the paper goes on to examine arguments that attempt to “justify” it either in terms of justice itself or of utility, and to identify the circumstances in which its use might be “justified” in Britain. The questions that surround its proper use are identified as being in large measure moral dilemmas.     

“自我的道德地形学”——一个具有心理学和社会学意涵的本体诠释学理论

在当今中国,社会学、心理学研究领域中所强调的“文化自觉”的旨趣在于凸显文化主体性以及文化间的和平沟通。“自我的道德地形学”无疑对这一旨趣具有独特的理论启示意义,它构成了C.泰勒的巨著《自我的根源》的主体部分,并在其诠释学思想中占有基础地位。“自我的道德地形学”首先是作为一个心理学理论被提出来的,而它的社会学意涵在以其为基础的、C.泰勒的著名政治理论论文“承认的政治”中充分地得以展现。鉴于这一理论以兼具心理学和社会学意涵的本体论诠释为基础,对错综复杂的历史经验具有条分缕析的阐释力,因此,作者认为,对该理论所具有的启示意义予以深刻地把握,对中国社会学、心理学在方兴未文的跨学科文化研究领域建构基础性的平台具有重要意义。     

Equality,responsibility, and justice as seen from a utilitarian perspective

A liberal democratic society must find a proper balance between respect for the basic equality of all human beings and respect for individual differences, including respect for individual excellence. Excessively equalitarian attitudes can be a major obstacle in accomplishing this. I first discuss the highly detrimental effects that such attitudes have had on American primary and secondary education. Then I discuss Rawls's suggestion to replace the traditional common-sense conception of justice, which he calls thesystem of liberal equality, with a much more equalitarian conception, which he calls thesystem of democratic equality. I argue that Rawls's conception of justice would be highly detrimental to society because it would needlessly discourage talented people from using their talents for the benefit of society.In my view, some of Rawls's arguments are based on misconceptions about the nature of free will and of moral responsibility. To clarify these issues, I am proposing a new conception of free will and of moral responsibility, which I call thebearer's responsibility view.Finally, I argue against the high priority that Rawls assigns to justice (or to fairness) over other social values, and against the even higher priority that Kant assigns to morality over other values of human life.     

The self as the locus of morality: A comparison between Charles Taylor and George Herbert Mead's theories of the moral constitution of the self

This paper provides a critical comparison of two leading exponents of the relationship between morality and selfhood: Charles Taylor and George Herbert Mead. Specifically, it seeks to provide an assessment of the contribution each approach is able to make to a social theory of morality that has the self at its heart. Ultimately, it is argued that Taylor's phenomenological account neglects the significance of interaction and social relations in his conceptualisation of the relationship between morality and self, which undermines the capacity of his framework to explain how moral understandings and dialogic moral subjectivity develop in a world of shared meaning. I then argue that Mead's pragmatist interactionist approach overcomes many of the flaws in Taylor's framework, and offers a grounded conceptualisation of the relationship between self and morality that is able to provide a basis for a properly social account of moral subjectivity.     

论道德回报

道德回报是道德的内在本质要求，是公正作为最基本、最重要的社会美德的充分彰显和具体体现，它使有序的社会伦理生活成为可能，同时也是道德自身“利益”实现的必要条件。道德回报之道德既是现实性道德与理想性道德的统一，也是道德义务与道德权利的统一。道德回报之回报包括“对道德的内在回报”和“对道德主体的外在回报”两个方面。道德回报机制的建立有赖于政府的道德化，并主要通过对行政人员的“赏善罚恶”实现政府对公平正义与和谐稳定的社会秩序的供给。     

The Moral Arc as a Pretzel: Social Justice in the Trenches

This article explores how social justice has been defined in social work practice and contests the claim of some in our profession that direct practice and social welfare programs are incompatible with social justice, drawing on Foucault’s work on the inextricable link between power and knowledge. This article proposes that social justice “in the trenches” needs further theorizing. Literature supporting a view that direct practice is congruent with a social justice perspective is reviewed. Theory of recognition is introduced as a possible overarching theory to ground direct practice within a social justice framework.     

Problems with the theory of anti-value acts： including a discussion with professor Zhou Guangquan

行为无价值论与结果无价值论的争论具有重要意义。行为无价值论的主要缺陷在于：强调犯罪的规范违反性，与保护法益的刑法目的相冲突；突出刑法的行为规制机能，偏离了罪刑法定主义的实质；普遍承认主观的违法要素，导致认定犯罪的整体性，既混淆了违法性与有责性，也不利于区分未遂犯与不能犯，且不利于贯彻共犯从属性说；注重主观的正当化要素，不仅未能限制刑罚适用，反而扩大了处罚范围；采取规则功利主义，导致过度干预国民的行为。结果无价值论在防止过度干预、采取自由主义原则的同时，将违反刑法目的的事态作为禁止的对象，不仅能够克服行为无价值论的缺陷，而且可以在实现报应正义的同时，实现特殊预防与一般预防。     

转型期中国公众的分配公平感：结果公平与机会公平

本文考察了中国公众的结果公平感和机会公平感,检验并比较了社会结构解释和相对剥夺解释在中国的适用性。研究发现,大多数公众认可结果公平和机会公平,且机会公平感高于结果公平感,但二者仅微弱相关。结果公平感由收入水平决定,机会公平感主要受教育水平影响。外资和私营单位雇员比国有和集体单位雇员更具机会公平感,城市中下层就业者对结果和机会分配均持批评态度。“个体相对剥夺”而不是“群体相对剥夺”对分配公平感有决定性影响,结果公平感只受横向剥夺影响,而机会公平感则主要受纵向剥夺影响。     

Economic perspectives on social exclusion

In this paper some economic perspectives on social exclusion are presented. The perspectives come from traditional areas of economics, especially human capital theory, and from the new area of behavioural economics, especially present bias and the status externality. They show that happiness, human capital and individual choice can yield insights for the study of social exclusion. The economic perspectives discussed in this paper can help respond to the suggestion by Mary Daly and Hilary Silver to move beyond the concept of social exclusion to a “fully‐articulated theory” of social exclusion. Furthermore they support the judgement of Ruth Levitas that in the public debate there is inadequate pressure for redistribution, excessive moral blame placed on the socially excluded, and an excessive concern for labour force participation at the expense of non‐market activity, as expressed in her development and discussion of the RED‐MUD‐SID framework of discourses.