关于福柯“治理术”的法理探析
发布时间：2019-01-24 19:50
【摘要】：权力问题是法学理论关注和研究的核心问题之一，而福柯独特的权力研究视角为传统的理论法学研究拓展了一些新的理论想象力与智识资源。传统的法学理论与政治哲学将权力定义为一种本质，比附为“利维坦”意志化的实体，福柯称之为“法权模式”。这种界定根本上是围绕着统治权定位的政治司法性权力，以法律的形式规定权力的行使方式与界限，在权力行使的合法性与正当性的基础上对权力进行法律化的分析。福柯正是在批判以霍布斯为代表的传统“法权模式”的基础上确立自己独特的权力研究路径。他主张，必须将权力的研究从传统“利维坦”模式中解放出来，在法律的统治权和国家制度划定的领域以外研究权力，摒弃统治权—法律的研究向度。将对权力的研究建立在权力技术的分析之上，将权力技术化，以权力的技术分析取代权力的法律分析。这样，福柯以“权力如何实践的”、“权力通过什么样的技术手段到达权力所欲求的效果”等问题置换了传统权力理论中“谁拥有权力”或者“权力拥有者的意图是什么”这之类的本质化问题。继而，福柯提出了现代社会中两大权力技术，围绕身体的规训权力技术和人口的调节权力技术。它们处于在不同的层面而相互支持，构成现代社会权力机制的两个序列。 随着两种权力的技术的相继出现，权力作用领域的重心也随之发生转移。传统统治权问题通常是统治者权力的保障，领土构成了传统政治最为基本的意象。传统统治权的最高权力的典型特征之一就是统治者拥有合法行使生杀予夺的大权。但是，从17世纪开始权力开始负担起生命的责任。围绕着身体与人口，权力机制开始规训和调节，造就一种温驯而有用的个体与整体。现代的生命性政治就逐渐颠覆传统的领土性政治。这不仅仅是一种权力技术的新变化，更为根本的是出现一种全新的权力治理思维，社会治理方式产生了从统治到治理的重要转向。治理术成为一个独立的领域和一种新的治理思维。在一定意义上讲，治理技术的逐渐成熟是统治权力的行使逐渐转向按照经济模式行使权力技术的过程，也是权力实践逐渐去威严化的过程。 福柯通过描绘了西方治理术的系谱，展现出治理与统治是两种根本异质性的政治技术与思维方式。福柯指出，现代西方的治理权力技术或者称之为治理术并不来源于古希腊文化中的总体化的政治—法律性权力。它是一种个人化的权力技术，来自于希伯来文明，最早的雏形是牧领权力，经过基督教的过渡后转化为规训治理技术与调节治理技术，，最终形成了现代西方社会的权力结构。
[Abstract]:Power is one of the core issues in the study of legal theory, and Foucault's unique perspective of power research has expanded some new theoretical imagination and intellectual resources for the traditional theoretical study of law. Traditional legal theory and political philosophy define power as a kind of essence, compared with "Leviathan" volitional entity, Foucault calls it "the mode of legal power". This kind of definition basically is the political judicial power which revolves around the ruling power localization, prescribes the power to exercise the way and the limit by the law form, carries on the legal analysis to the power on the basis of the legitimacy and the legitimacy of the power exercise. Foucault established his own unique path of power research on the basis of criticizing Hobbes' traditional mode of legal power. He argued that it is necessary to liberate the study of power from the traditional Leviathan model, to study the power outside the realm of the rule of law and the national system, and to abandon the research direction of the ruling power and the law. The study of power is based on the analysis of power technology, and the technical analysis of power is replaced by the technical analysis of power. In this way, Foucault "how power is put into practice", The question of "who owns the power" or "what is the intention of the power holder" in the traditional power theory has been replaced by the question of "what kind of technical means does the power achieve the desired effect of the power" and so on, and so on the essential question such as "who owns the power" or "what is the intention of the power holder"? Subsequently, Foucault put forward two power technologies in modern society, which revolve around body discipline power technology and population regulation power technology. They support each other at different levels and form two sequences of power mechanisms in modern society. With the emergence of the two kinds of power technology, the center of gravity in the field of power also shifts. The issue of traditional ruling power is usually the guarantee of rulers' power, and territory constitutes the most basic image of traditional politics. One of the typical features of the supreme power of traditional ruling power is that the ruler has the right to exercise life and death legally. However, from the 17 th century, power began to bear the responsibility of life. Around the body and population, the power mechanism began to discipline and regulate, creating a tame and useful individual and whole. Modern life politics gradually subverts the traditional territorial politics. This is not only a new change of power technology, but also a new thinking of power governance. Governance has become an independent field and a new kind of governance thinking. To a certain extent, the maturation of governance technology is the process that the exercise of ruling power turns to exercise power technology according to economic model, and it is also the process of power practice gradually deimposing. Foucault depicts the genealogy of western governance and shows that governance and rule are two fundamental heterogeneous political techniques and modes of thinking. Foucault pointed out that modern western governance techniques, or governance techniques, do not stem from the collectivized political-legal power of ancient Greek culture. It is a kind of individualized power technology, which comes from the Hebrew civilization. The earliest embryonic form is the pastoral power. After the transition of Christianity, it is transformed into the governing technique of discipline and regulation, and finally forms the power structure of the modern western society.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D90
本文编号：2414790
[Abstract]:Power is one of the core issues in the study of legal theory, and Foucault's unique perspective of power research has expanded some new theoretical imagination and intellectual resources for the traditional theoretical study of law. Traditional legal theory and political philosophy define power as a kind of essence, compared with "Leviathan" volitional entity, Foucault calls it "the mode of legal power". This kind of definition basically is the political judicial power which revolves around the ruling power localization, prescribes the power to exercise the way and the limit by the law form, carries on the legal analysis to the power on the basis of the legitimacy and the legitimacy of the power exercise. Foucault established his own unique path of power research on the basis of criticizing Hobbes' traditional mode of legal power. He argued that it is necessary to liberate the study of power from the traditional Leviathan model, to study the power outside the realm of the rule of law and the national system, and to abandon the research direction of the ruling power and the law. The study of power is based on the analysis of power technology, and the technical analysis of power is replaced by the technical analysis of power. In this way, Foucault "how power is put into practice", The question of "who owns the power" or "what is the intention of the power holder" in the traditional power theory has been replaced by the question of "what kind of technical means does the power achieve the desired effect of the power" and so on, and so on the essential question such as "who owns the power" or "what is the intention of the power holder"? Subsequently, Foucault put forward two power technologies in modern society, which revolve around body discipline power technology and population regulation power technology. They support each other at different levels and form two sequences of power mechanisms in modern society. With the emergence of the two kinds of power technology, the center of gravity in the field of power also shifts. The issue of traditional ruling power is usually the guarantee of rulers' power, and territory constitutes the most basic image of traditional politics. One of the typical features of the supreme power of traditional ruling power is that the ruler has the right to exercise life and death legally. However, from the 17 th century, power began to bear the responsibility of life. Around the body and population, the power mechanism began to discipline and regulate, creating a tame and useful individual and whole. Modern life politics gradually subverts the traditional territorial politics. This is not only a new change of power technology, but also a new thinking of power governance. Governance has become an independent field and a new kind of governance thinking. To a certain extent, the maturation of governance technology is the process that the exercise of ruling power turns to exercise power technology according to economic model, and it is also the process of power practice gradually deimposing. Foucault depicts the genealogy of western governance and shows that governance and rule are two fundamental heterogeneous political techniques and modes of thinking. Foucault pointed out that modern western governance techniques, or governance techniques, do not stem from the collectivized political-legal power of ancient Greek culture. It is a kind of individualized power technology, which comes from the Hebrew civilization. The earliest embryonic form is the pastoral power. After the transition of Christianity, it is transformed into the governing technique of discipline and regulation, and finally forms the power structure of the modern western society.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D90
【共引文献】
相关博士学位论文 前10条
1 吴瑛;中国话语权生产机制研究[D];上海外国语大学;2010年
2 陆秀英;中国当代翻译文学系统中主体间关系的生态分析[D];上海外国语大学;2010年
3 武克勤;英伽登文学本体论思想研究[D];苏州大学;2010年
4 张海斌;转型社会中的乡村自治与法治[D];华东政法大学;2010年
5 傅美蓉;从反再现到承认的政治[D];陕西师范大学;2010年
6 魏晓东;银行监管权配置的法律问题研究[D];辽宁大学;2010年
7 赵方杜;身体规训：中国现代性进程中的国家权力与身体[D];南开大学;2010年
8 蔡勇庆;生态神学视野下的福克纳小说研究[D];南开大学;2010年
9 张凤莲;马克思对西方政治思想传统的挑战[D];南开大学;2010年
10 钱海平;以《中国建筑》与《建筑月刊》为资料源的中国建筑现代化进程研究[D];浙江大学;2011年
本文编号：2414790
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/falilunwen/2414790.html
